All High Courts In Anambra State Were Air Conditioned During My Time – Fmr. Chief Judge, Peter Umeadi

117 min read 23,370 words 2 views

*Says Challenge of the Judiciary Is Independence
*Backs JUSUN on their Struggle For Independence of the
Judiciary
*Says He Joined UNN As Lecturer, After Retirement From Bench, To
Keep Up Pace Of Work

Prof. Peter Nnanna Chukwudi Umeadi is a former Chief
Judge of Anambra State. A former President of the world Association
of Judges under the auspices of the World Jurists Association
(WJA). He is currently a visiting Prof. of Law at the University of
Nigeria, Enugu campus.

Prof. Umeadi recently declared his intention to contest
election in 2023 on the platform of the All Progessives Grand
Alliance (APGA).

Exerpts:

LAW PERSONALITY INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

Congratulations for having a meritorious service at the
High Court of Anambra State Judiciary from which you retired
recently as a Chief Judge. You had what could be described as a
successful law practice in Lagos as a lawyer. Why did you choose to
leave the Bar for the Bench?

There is an allure which the Bar has that make it difficult to
be abandoned. Perhaps that explains that persons who have retired
in their chosen career go back to studying law and be called to the
Bar. I graduated LL. B (Hons) from the University of Nigeria Enugu
Campus in 1979. I attended the Nigeria Law School in Lagos and was
called to the Bar in 1980. I served in the NYSC from 1980 to 1981
in Lagos State. It was time to delve into the practice of the law
itself. I chose to remain in Lagos after my NYSC. My classmate in
the University and Law School and my friend Chukwudum Ikeazor Esq,
thought of something which could be helpful. His father Chief
Chimezie Ikeazor SAN of blessed memory had a law office at No.14/16
Abibu Oki Street on Lagos Island. Chukwudum took me there on the
3rd floor and put me into that law office. He had interests other
that litigation which he left to pursue. Eventually he joined the
British Police Force like his grandfather who was a Commissioner of
Police in the colonial era in Eastern Region of Nigeria. He is
author of books. I found myself ensconced in the heart of Lagos in
an opportune office space to practice my law. It was too good to be
true. Yet I started immediately, printing my visiting card with the
existing telephone in the office. My business of law practice had
started. I knew my days were numbered. It lasted for some months
before the bubble burst. The landlords of the premises would come
to repossess their space when the term expired since late Chief
Chimezie Ikeazor SAN had since stopped using the office. I left the
office. Later I was told of a senior lawyer who needed a junior
lawyer to work with on an

associate basis. That suited me and I applied. Behold, in a
twist of fate the senior lawyer Late Chief B.I.D Ezeogu of blessed
memory of B.I.D Ezeogu and Associates, Legal Practitioners, had
taken up the same office space at 14/16 Abibu Oki Street Lagos. I
was to work with him from October 1981 until December 1981. He was
genial and accommodating and I sat back to learn the ropes. However
my past stay in the same office would come up to bring me unmerited
troubles. My principal was using the same phone number which late
Chief Chimezie Ikeazor SAN used, which my friend Chukwudum Ikeazor
Esq transferred to me, which I printed on my call cards. Quite
often my erstwhile clients would call and when my principal picked
the phone which was on his table they would ask of my humble self
as the owner of the number. My principal considered it impudent of
me to give out his phone number as mine and bring him disturbance.
I was in a dilemma, I had distributed many of my cards and no way I
could stop the calls. In chastising me he had told me how much he
paid for the office. He had been very nice to me. He had taken me
to the Ritz Hotel across Broad Street, for lunch in the best
traditions of the Bar, on occasions when I had impressed him with
how I handled what he assigned to me to do. I decided not to
complicate things by telling him I was in the office before he took
it up and set my mind to leave his law office in December 1981. He
was such a nice man as he tried to make me not leave early before
Christmas, when I informed him, as according to him, that is when
juniors should stay and get whatever briefs could come their way.
Well, before Christmas 1981 I left Lagos and returned to my dear
mother of blessed memory at Aba. In February 1982 I was well rested
and I set to return once more to Lagos to engage my fortunes and
see what is in store for me. My family already made arrangement
where I would stay from where I would hit the streets again to
search for work. On the day of my departure through Port
Harcourt airport. I met Jude Idigbe Esq. my classmate from C.K.C
Onitsha and my senior at the Bar by one year. I had not seen him
since we left the University of Nigeria Enugu Campus. We embraced
and in our talk I learnt he was in Port Harcourt to do a court
matter. I told him how I made a retreat from Lagos to gather
myself. How having rested I was returning to Lagos to see what
nature had in store for me. He told me he was working in the
Chambers of Chief Rotimi Williams SAN, the doyen of the Nigerian
Bar. He further told me that the chambers had vacancies and that if
I was interested he could get me to come for the interview sometime
in March 1982. I signified interest immediately and he promised to
do as we talked and we dispersed. I was taken to work as a junior
counsel in the Chambers of Chief Rotimi Williams SAN. There I
remained from March 1982 to December 1983. That would earn me the
membership of the prestigious BLACK TABLE. With all modesty I would
describe that opportunity as being at the tower of legal practice
in Nigeria. Chief Rotimi Williams SAN was a humane person,
passionate with his vocation as a lawyer, and a man full of charity
and compassion. Nature also had endowed him with wisdom,
discernment, family both nuclear and extended surrounding him and
allowed him a happy long life to which was added opulence. When I
left the Chambers of Chief Rotimi Williams SAN, I returned to
Onitsha where I set up my law firm of Peter Umeadi and Co, Legal
Practitioners at 22 Oguta Road Onitsha. There I was in the same
premises with late Humphrey Egwuatu Esq, late Ndidi Chinwuba Esq,
Chief Clement C. Mbadinuju (Odera) who later became the Governor of
Anambra State and Jide Okorji Esq. P.A. Afuba Esq. who later became
Attorney General of Anambra State on two different occasions and
also Commissioner for Lands was there and Hon. Linda Ikpeazu,
Member House of Representative in National Assembly later had her
constituency office in the same building. I was the first lawyer to
set up office in that building. I would return to Lagos again in
March 1992. I set up office first at 22 Wilmer Street Ilupeju
courtesy of my good friend late Fide Onyekwelu Esq. and later moved
to 94 Obafemi Awolowo Road Ikeja. In 1997 by the intervention of my
uncle and mentor Chief Philip Ezebilo Umeadi SAN of blessed memory,
I was sworn in as a Judge of the High Court of Anambra State on
14/1/1997. I started with the Bar and ended up on the Bench. The
Bench is the pinnacle of the career in the legal profession. I
enjoyed work at the Bar of which I had the privilege to be exposed
to different facets of endeavor. When I had the opportunity to move
up to the Bench I took it gladly. It represents the completion of
the cycle of my career as a legal practitioner for which
achievement I count as providential grace.

Looking back to your career at the Bench would you say
that you had a fulfilled professional experience? How and
why.

Yes, I had a fulfilled career at the
Bench. I was told by a former Chief Registrar in the old Anambra
State who later became a Judge of High Court of Anambra State that
I was the youngest person to be made a Judge in the Eastern Region
at the time. It became evident, as soon after my appointment the
scramble for the younger lawyers to get on the Bench started. With
all modesty my litigation and solicitors works at the Bar prepared
me for my work on the Bench. It did not however save me from the
baptism of fire which I went through on my first day of sitting on
the Bench at High Court Nnewi. One had to transform to the new mind
set about work on the Bench which ought to center on dispensing
justice to all manner of men without fear or favour ill will or
affection. It was the duty of the Judge to listen to the argument
on the matter before him from all the facts and hopefully come to a
reasonable decision based on the law. There is a penchant in our
Nigerian psyche where everyone expects to win and are hard put to
accept defeat. However, the truism is that from the onset some
facts have more weight than others and if things were properly
considered some matters ought not progress to litigation at all,
those matters should have been resolved through the Alternative
Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism where available. The sad fact
sometimes is that notwithstanding the weak facts of a case parties
prefer to proceed on to protracted litigation. When they lose they
blame everyone else except themselves. The Emeritus Chief Judge of
Anambra State, Justice Obiora Nwazota of blessed memory would
always remind us Judges that the Bench is not a place where you
come to be popular. It is all about doing the right thing at all
times. I would say with modesty that I held to those tenets in all
my time on the Bench.

What was your greatest challenge at the Bench as a
Chief Judge, how did you overcome that?

As a Chief Judge my greatest challenge was how to maintain the
independence of the Judiciary. The concept of separation of powers
is irritating to the political class, which is accentuated from our
years of military rule. In America, the Executive, Legislature and
Judiciary are referred to as co-equal arms of government. In
Nigeria it is anathema to suggest such. I have said it publicly and
may repeat here without fear of contradiction, that at no time
under the tenure of the (2) two Governors when I served as Chief
Judge did I receive any interference with regard to the decision of
cases before the Courts. Anambra State Judiciary may not have been
the best looked after but we had a reasonable life line to operate
as an arm of government. However, there were very many State
Judiciaries who were much below the water mark. It is said that
injustice for one translate to injustice to all. It was difficult
to erase the feeling of those in the Executive arm of government
that the Judiciary is not an appendage of the Ministry of Justice.
Any attempt to correct this was likened to trying to create an
empire from the state bloc and was met with umbrage and blackmail.
In the end the dislike against the Judiciary and her staff was
pervasive in the public service and gave rise to constant denials.
There is the story from a biography where a Chief Judge met with a
Military Administrator of a State in the western part of Nigeria to
discuss the list of names penciled to be made Judges. The Military
Administrator was quiet as the Chief Judge described a candidate as
a good lawyer, dedicated, honest and humble. The last word rocked
the boat! The Military Administrator thundered, “that is how they
all are until you make them a Judge and they turn into a tin god”
The public servant who fashion government policies and even legal
practitioners find it difficult to come to terms with the
metamorphosis of a person who has been made a Judge. The judicial
responsibility of a Judge is not to be shared with any. Moreover,
the administrative needs of a judge is peculiar. A judge would
require at the minimum, two clerks of court, one Secretary typist,
one messenger, one Police orderly, and a driver. If you add those
who should assist at his residence the list grows. The career civil
servants who advise the government find it difficult to accommodate
these basic needs of the Judiciary. It would be different if we
understand and embrace separation of powers. I do not know whether
I met the challenge of asserting the independence of the Judiciary
while in office but I gave it my best shot. It is challenge
we have to confront collectively for the smooth running of that
critical arm of government.

Recently you congratulated President Muhammadu Buhari
for signing Order No.10 of 2020 into law why? You also requested
him to extend the Order to include obedience to orders of courts of
competent jurisdiction, why.

Yes, on 22/5/2020 on my twitter handle @me_llord, with humility,
I congratulated Mr. President on “the bold, irreversible step in
entrenching the rule of law”. By irreversible, I meant that the
genie has left the bottle! On the same tweet I said “the offshoot
should be obedience to decision of court of competent jurisdiction,
whether favourable or not and seek appropriate redress according to
law.” I should think that is self explanatory. In all situation
change is hard to accept such that the issuance of Executive Order
no 10 of 2020 broke the glass ceiling. The independence of the
Judiciary rests on the constitutional concept of separation of
powers which drive the rule of law. All these would be a mirage
without financial autonomy for the Judiciary. In my speech of the
legal year ceremonies of 2014/2015 on 22/9/2014 I said inter alia,
“it is fitting that I would start with praising the effort of JUSUN
in ushering in the much needed financial autonomy to the Judiciary
in Nigeria. I have been constant and continue in the expression of
my faith and appreciation to the contribution of the Judiciary
staff. At no time more than now should I ask of all Judiciary staff
in Anambra State in particular and the Nigeria Judiciary in general
to stand up and take a bow…… These men and women who guard
sometimes with their lives, the files, documents, exhibits and
other court property without which the courts cannot function. They
turn up to their duty posts daily under rain and sunshine sometimes
with their meagre salaries to produce vital documents that are of
grave importance to the life and death struggles that represent
many a legal battle. Maybe since these facts happens daily we tend
to take them for granted. But I consider them heroic deeds…. The
best moment of the Judiciary staff seems to have arrived. They
filed a suit for financial autonomy for the State Judiciaries
pursuant to Section 121(3) of the Constitution of Nigeria 1999.
Judgement was given in their favour. When the various States
Governments delayed in obeying the judgement of the court they
embarked on a nationwide strike which was only called off to allow
those states still sitting on the fence to obey …. I congratulate
JUSUN for this historic feat” The way the legal profession is
fashioned the Bar is the bulwark of Bench. Ideally the Bar should
be in the forefront of the struggle in Nigeria for financial
autonomy for the Judiciary. I doubt if that is the case. Rather the
JUSUN with their meagre salaries are the ones who went to court and
won financial autonomy for the courts which the Governors neither
implemented nor appealed against. The senior lawyers who earn fees
from court appearances were nowhere to be found. I speak here with
all sense of responsibility that the leading lights of the Bar were
harassing and intimidating the JUSUN to stop their fight. There may
be few senior lawyers who have sympathy for the cause of the
independence of Judiciary and did something about it but we would
not fail to chronicle that Dr. Olisa Agbakoba SAN on his own went
to court to enforce the financial autonomy of the Judiciary. Like
JUSUN he got a court judgement which the Governors neither
implemented nor appealed against. The mainstream media should also
review its role because in the final analysis everyone runs to the
court for protection. The full import of independence of the
Judiciary mean that even Judges also would face the wrath of the
law if they transgress in their official duties. They would be
tried according to law and if found guilty would suffer the penalty
for their offence. The same would apply to all and sundry. Nobody
is above the law. It is with this mindset that we need to support
financial autonomy on the basis of separation of powers, to
strengthen the rule of law as a corner stone for the development of
our country Nigeria. On this subject the JUSUN are the undisputed
heroes.

Independence for the judiciary have failed and how do
you think we can get it right this time around?

I do not agree that the independence of the Judiciary failed.
No, not at any time. Permit me to bring up excerpts from The 8th
Dignity of Man Lecture which I was privileged to delivered during
the 56th Founders Day Celebrations of University of Nigeria Nisukka
on Friday October 7th 2016 at the famous Princess Alexandria
Auditorium UNN. The title is Rule of Law as Foundation of any
Nation. “Our Judiciary have exhibited patriotism, erudition,
lucidity, candour and courage in their work. Our Judiciary have
kept in full view the expectations of prosperity, safety,
wellbeing, the respectability and dignity of our citizens. The work
of our Judiciary are embedded in the respect and observance of the
immutable, inevitable, inscrutable adherence and acquiescence and
upholding of the rule of law. Suit No. SC/58/69 (1) E.O. Lakanmi
(2) Kikelomo Ola (by her guardian and next friend E.O. Lakanmi)
versus (1) The Attorney General (west) (2) The Secretary to the
Tribunal (3) The counsel to the Tribunal came up to the Supreme
Court in 1969. I think this one monumental work, relevant to the
topic of today stands in good credit to the Nigerian Judiciary…………
In unraveling the matrix of the facts, the Supreme Court of
Nigeria, exhibited uncommon commitment to work and dexterity when
it elected, on its own, to delve into issues which arose but which
the court below did not deal with. Listen again to portion of the
Judgement of the Supreme Court in Lakanmi’s case (supra) inter alia
“we are in no doubt that the object of the Federal Military
Government when it engaged in this exercise is to clean up a
section of the society which had engaged itself in corrupt
practices – those vampires in the society whose occupation was to
enrich themselves at the expense of the country. But if, in this
pursuit the Government however well-meaning, fell into the error of
passing legislation which specifically in effect, passed judgement
and inflicted punishment or in other words eroded the jurisdiction
of the courts, in a manner that the dignity and freedom of the
individual, once assured, are taken away, the courts must
intervene. (the underlining is mine) Every case we reiterate, must
be considered on its own facts and the materials placed before us
in this matter lead to no other conclusion than that the provision
of the Decree No. 45 of 1968 are such as are not reasonably
necessary to achieve the purpose which the Federal Military
Government set out to fulfill. This appeal will therefore be
allowed and both Edict No. 5 of 1967 and Decree No. 45 of 1968 are
declared ultra vires; they are null and void”…. Let us bring to
mind the situation in Nigeria in 1969 when this matter came up to
the Supreme Court up till 1970 when the judgement was delivered!
Far from losing her independence the Judiciary in Nigeria is
populated with jurists of caliber, pedigree, honesty forthrightness
courage and many sterling qualities. The Election Tribunal of which
I was a member heard the Petition No. EDGV/EPT/1/07 Comrade Adams
Aliyu Oshiomole & Anor v INEC & 21 Ors. On Thursday 20/3/2008, I
had the singular privilege, while delivering the unanimous
judgement, to refer to the Judiciary in Nigeria as follows “On our
part, we with humility shall repeat the words of Sir Isaac Newton
and say that we are standing on the shoulders of giants, giants of
the Nigerian Judiciary which have afforded us all the judicial
precedents we have used” What failed is the lack of political will,
the collective stand of the Bar for which the Judiciary is their
place of work, the voice of the public and mainstream media to
insist that proper, adequate and unfettered funding be made
available to the Judiciary necessary to maintain her independence.
Late President Musa Yar’ Adua on an event to open the biannual
Judges Conference promised to make the Governors to comply with the
Constitution of Nigeria and fund the State Judiciaries as required.
He kept his word soon after at the National Council of State
Meeting which followed where he told the Governors in clear
language to go home and implement S 121 (3) of the Constitution of
Nigeria 1999. Soon after he fell ill and did not recover. The
Judiciary lost a great ally in the struggle. It was said that he as
Governor of Kastina State implemented financial autonomy with all
the arms government in the State. It is a happy coincidence that
another President from Kastina signed the Executive Order No. 10 of
2020 into law.

What is your view on Governors resistance to the
autonomy and financial independence for the judiciary and States
legislature?

I see that the Governors are playing a game of convenience. Only
a few States are able to sustain themselves. Many states are owing
back log of salaries. I copied the quote below from a platform I
belong to “Government can’t be about paying salaries or pension. If
the population is approximately 5 million: Civil Servants census
45,000; pensioners 205,000 (plus dead and ghost pensioners). So if
government cater for 250,000 staff and ex staff what happens to the
remaining 4.750 million?” The author should know as he was
Secretary to State Government at one point. The Governors hold on
to State finances meant for the other arms of government for
survival. The Governors also hold the funds of the Local Government
Councils. All they do is pay salaries to staff and spend the rest
without recourse to the Councils. They also collect and hold and
spend monies from entities under the constitutional control of the
Local Government Councils, contrary decision of courts of competent
jurisdiction. See (a) Suit No. 0/265/2004 Chief (Prof.) A.N.A.
Modebe & 10 Ors v Igwe Okonkwo of Amansi: Ex parte (1) Lazarus Uba
(2) Innocent Iwuagwu delivered on 23/72004 by Umeadi J (as he then
was) unreported: pp 19-32 The Day the Eagle Emerged; The legal
works of Hon. Justice Peter N.C. Umeadi. Selected Ruling Judgements
and Reviews (b) Knight Frank & Rutely Nig. v Attorney General Kano
State (1998) 7NLR P.19 . I venture to say that the day authentic
full financial autonomy for the arms of government is realized,
many wrong things would normalize. Every arm of government would
cut their coats according to their size. The restructuring everyone
is clamoring for would be waiting for us at dawn.

You were President of the World Association of Judges
for two consecutive terms, when did your tenure end. How do you
think that membership of such international professional
associations will impact positively on the efficiency of Nigerian
judges?

Yes, I joined the Governing Board of the World Jurist
Association (WJA)after the election at the 25th Biennial World Law
Congress on November 2nd 2017 at the Caribbean Island of Aruba. I
was elected President of the World Association of Judges (WAJ)
under the auspices of the WJA. On my return to Nigeria I was
admitted to see My Lord the Chief Justice of Nigeria (as he then
was) Justice W.S.N. Onnoghen, GCON where I formally notified him of
my election and he gladly received the news of my appointment,
congratulated me and wished me well. The next day I met with
Administrator of The National Judicial institute (NJI) Justice
R.P.I Bozomo OFR. His Excellency Chief Willie Obiano the Governor
of Anambra State called in from USA to congratulate my humble self.
I was further received by Abubakar Malami SAN, Hon. Attorney
General of the Federation and Minister of Justice in his office in
Abuja. In that position I stepped into the big shoes of Prince Bola
Ajibola, of blessed memory, former Judge of the World Court at
Hague and the immediate past President of the World Association of
Judges. The World Jurist Association came about in July 1957 when a
gala was organized in honour of the American Bar Association in
London. There Charles Ryhne the President of the American Bar
Association, Justice Earl Waren the Chief Justice of the United
States Supreme Court and Sir Winston Churchill agreed to promote
Peace through Law which later changed to World Jurist Association
“world ruled by law not force.” In 1963 Charles Ryhne and Justice
Earl Waren convened in Greece, the first World Conference on Law.
The President of America John F. Kennedy in a message to the
conference termed it “The First World Conference on World Peace
through Rule of Law” bringing to fore “the rule of law, separation
of powers, to ensure freedom and justice” In 1965 President Lydon B
Johnson inaugurated the 2nd World Law Congress in Washington DC
which was chaired by Truman and Eisenhower both past Presidents of
the United States of America. Nigeria has a rich history of
participation in WJA. Justice M.L Uwais GCON, former Chief Justice
of Nigeria is an Honorary President of WJA Worldwide; Justice M.B
Belgore GCON former Chief Justice of Nigeria was onetime President
of the Nigerian Chapter of WJA. and thereby member of the Advisory
Council. Justice Umaru Abdullahi, CON former President of the Court
of Appeal an ardent participant of WJA. The World Law Congress of
WJA has been hosted in Nigeria. While I was the President of the
World Association of Judges I secured the privilege to register the
World Association of Judges under the auspices of the World Jurist
Association in Nigeria. I am therefore a Trustee of the World
Association of the Judges registered as a corporate body on
23/4/2019 with no. CAC/IT/NO128023. The center for Continuing
Education for Judges in Nigeria is the National Judicial institute
(NJI). The NJI has a close relationship with the WJA, which have
yielded beneficial and rewarding results. In the last World Law
Congress which took place in Madrid Spain from 19th – 20th February
2019 Justice W.S.N. Onnoghen CJN (as he then was) was billed to be
one of the speakers. The NJI allowed a whopping 64 (sixty four)
Judges to attend. At the World Law Congress in Madrid in 2019 I was
reelected as the President of the World Association of Judges and
retained my seat on the Global Board of WJA. I was President for
WJA Africa; President for WJA Nigeria and Representative of WJA to
the United Nations in Geneva. Soon after the Madrid Congress
trouble erupted on the Board. The new worldwide President got the
upper hand in the Board room skirmishes and sometime in January
2020 all the Board Members including my humble self were removed.
In April 2020 I was surprised to receive a letter from the
Executive Director of World Jurist Association and World Law
Foundation informing me that a letter from the Worldwide President
had been enclosed for me. She mentioned that after all matters had
been settled she hoped I can join the Congress and keep on working
for the promotion of the Rule of Law. I opened the enclosure and
found the brochure for the World Law Congress for 2021 slated for
Bogota Colombia and a two page letter signed by the Worldwide
President of WJA saying he would be delighted if I could actively
participate in the Congress and ended the letter with “I would love
you to join the project”. On my twitter handle @me_llord I tweeted
as follows “Javier Cremades Gracia, Worldwide President World
Jurist Association and World Law Foundation, graciously invited me
to participate at the XXVIII Biennial Congress of the World Jurist
Association to be held in Bogota from 8th – 10th February 2021. I
delightfully accepted”. The magic of the moment was that Javier
Cremades retweeted my tweet which now went viral. I was the only
member of the removed Board who was invited back. I am happily back
to promoting the Rule of law. I am a Member of the Organizing
Committee of the World Law Congress 2021 now shifted to November
2021 in Bogota Colombia. As a run up to Bogota, Opening Sessions
via webinar on Zoom have been planned. It started in Barcelona and
gone to Chile. I held a meeting via Zoom with the Executive
Director and the CEO of the Congress where I was mandated to
coordinate the Opening Session in Nigeria for April 2021 which is
tagged the African Round Table including eminent jurists across the
continent of Africa. For now, all my titles on WJA did not survive
our removal from the Board. I should be content with Trustee of
World Association of Judges and Member Organizing Committee of the
World Law Congress 2021.

You had brushes with the Bar Association as a Chief
Judge. from the benefit of hindsight, what is your
view on Bar-Bench relationship and how best will differences
between them be resolved in the best interest of the
society?

In suit No. A/53/2013 Chief S.U.S Mbanaso v Incorporated
Trustees of the Nigerian Bar Association NBA & 8 Ors, I made an
order of interim injunction against the 9 defendants on 19/3/2013.
The copious pleadings in the matter show that the plaintiff was the
Chairman of the NBA Awka Branch (AwkaBar). In the preceding
National NBA election he backed a candidate who lost. The majority
of the members of Awka Bar who backed the candidate who won vowed
to unseat him supported by the powers that be. In order to save his
position the plaintiff filed several suits in the High Court of
Anambra State. I spread the suits to different Judges within the
Judicial Division and some remained in my court. Each time the
matter came up in my court I persuaded the legal practitioners for
both sides to find a meeting point and settle their differences for
the sake of the Bar. I counselled that the Bar ought to remain
united and strong and at the same time should be vigilant for the
protection of the Judiciary. I was surprised at the utterances and
behavior I saw from Bar members in court who had been mandated to
disrobe the sitting Chairman at all cost, and they said not even
the cases in court could change that. The fears came to the fore
when in one of the cases in Suit No. A/Misc. 109/2012, Chief (Bar)
S.U.S. Mbanaso v J.C Anekwe Esq. and 6 Ors. The High Court per Hon.
Justice J.C Iguh, of blessed memory, the Administrative Judge of
Awka Judicial Division, made an order of interim injunction
maintaining the status quo pending the determination of the motion
on notice. The order was made on 3/9/2012. The motion on notice was
fixed for 10/9/2012. The members of the Awka Bar refused to obey
the court order and continued with the harassment of the plaintiff.
It was in the wake of all these that Suit No. A/53/2013. was filed.
The Awka Bar Executives were chasing plaintiff around the town and
his residence to divest him of the property of the Awka Bar Branch
including the official bus in the style of NURTW. After I reviewed
the affidavits and annexures I made an order of interim injunction
against the 1st to 9th defendants. Trouble broke loose. The
leadership of the National NBA sent word out that I had committed
sacrilege by ordering an interim injunction against the NBA. Many
lawyers did not agree with them and both sides now engaged
themselves on the social media. The date for 2nd Chief Judge’s
Dinner was fixed for 21/3/2013. The National NBA issued orders to
lawyers to boycott all activities of the Chief Judge based on the
interim order of 19/3/2013. The Judiciary had expended huge
resources to invite Judges from Ghana and Nairobi to build the
capacity of the Bar and Bench in Anambra State on matters of
Mediation and Case Flow Management. If I was not a Bar man, why
should I spend scarce Judiciary resources to beef up capacity of
the Bar in Anambra State only to have the National NBA sabotage
same with connivance from members in Anambra. The National NBA
pursued me and still the President of NBA wrote a petition against
the Chief Judge of Anambra State to the National Judicial Council,
(NJC), which petition was referred to me to answer. Amidst many
complaints they raised the decision of the Supreme Court in
Mohammed v Olawunmi (1993) 4 NWLR pt 287 p. 254. On my defense I
countered with the case of Comex Ltd v Nigeria Arab Bank Ltd (1997)
3 NWLR pt 499 at p.643 where Mohammed v Olawunmi and Ors was
raised, and it did not stop the Supreme Court, Coram Wali, Kutigi,
Ogundare, Mohammed and Onu JJSC to hear the appeal on the merits.
By a letter dated 23/7/2013 the NJC wrote to the President of NBA
and copied the Chief Judge of Anambra State that the National
Judicial Council (NJC) considered the explanations of the Chief
Judge of Anambra State as satisfactory. That was the end of the
petition. It need be said that there is a lot of malice at the Bar.
The Bench from time to time get their fair share of terrorism from
the Bar. It could be better. All the above notwithstanding it did
not affect my preference to enhance the position of the Bar. That
open minded approach paid off exceedingly. I left the Bench with
the strong support and appreciation from the Bar which endures till
today. Then the Chairman of the NBA Branches in Anambra State wrote
a letter to see the Chief Judge, which letter did not contain the
purpose of their visit. The Chief Judge was busy preparing for the
legal year ceremonies for 2014/2015 coming up on 22/9/2014. The
arrival proceeded well, spiced with light banter. Then things began
to change, the Chairman of Chairmen asked another Chairman to speak
for them, who began in a rather belligerent and disrespectful
manner. I was told that they were sent by the National NBA to get
answers on several issues. Their speaker reeled out 12 points of
which I took notes as he spoke. It became clear that they came to
my chambers to make trouble. The issues raised were purely
administrative issues. I thought it preposterous and provocative
but I kept quiet. The was abusive and spoke as if he came from a
higher authority to with the Chief Judge would obey. But they were
dabbling into matters which they knew absolutely nothing about.
They left the worst for the last when they told me that all the
Chairmen and their Executives have been invited by the new NBA
President for a cocktail in Abuja and would be absent from our
legal year ceremonies and only the Chairman of Chairmen would be
left behind to read their address. I swallowed hard. When the man
stopped talking I asked if he was done and he confirmed to me that
he was done. I then said “Gentlemen I have heard all you said. I
will give you my response on another day”. The meeting ended they
left. Later I got a call from the Governor of Anambra State that
the NBA President had reported to him that the Chief Judge walked
out the lawyers who came to see him from his chambers. That the
Chief Judge should apologise to the lawyers or the lawyers in
Anambra State would boycott all the events of the Chief Judge. The
Governor was worried and asked me to go and apologise to the
lawyers. I narrated what transpired to the Governor and that I did
not walk them out. The Governor saw that my version was different
from what the NBA President told him and called back the NBA
President prevailing instead on him to take the lawyers back to the
Chief Judge and make the lawyers apologise to the Chief Judge for
their rudeness. The President of NBA told the Governor that if that
delegation was to happen it need not be led by him. The matter was
again escalated when the Anambra NBA went to their NBA NEC meeting
at Uyo and reported that the Chief Judge walked them out of his
chambers. At this point 8 (eight) Senior Advocates of Nigeria came
to see me on the matter I told them what transpired and gave them
the list of 12 demands. They made it clear it was unacceptable to
bring the Governor into a matter between the Chief Judge and the
Bar. It came to fore that all the persons who were in my chambers
on that day affirmed that the word I put above were the only words
I spoke when the man finished speaking. None heard me walking them
away. The NBA President and some Anambra lawyers were now
rationalizing the matter that what I said amounts to walking them
out of my chambers. The truth is that they came to provoke me but
were frustrated and disappointed because I contained myself and
dodged their belligerence. The SANs blamed the Branch Chairmen for
not coming to them before reporting the matter again at Uyo. The
SANs assured the Chief Judge that Friday next they would come and
find out a convenient day when they would bring the Chairmen of the
Branches and their Executive to apologise and the meeting ended
with group photographs. I have laid out instances of two ‘brushes’
which from the outcome look like they were contrived. In the end
senior members of the Bar investigated, found the bad faith in
their action, brought them to apologise which I accepted and
continued with my aim to reposition the Bar and the Bench when I
had the opportunity to do so. The dire position in which legal
practice was in Anambra State before I became Chief Judge is
captured in my legal year ceremonies for 2012/2013 speech on
24/9/2012 inter alia “By a comparative chart drawn, the maximum
number of shut down of courts in other jurisdiction all over the
country would be 8 as against 18 for Anambra State. I think that we
have a collective duty to the Judiciary and our conscience to
accept that in the closure of court is archaic, an invitation to
anarchy and bereft of christian charity. Apart from throwing the
stakeholders into material want, the liberty of individuals, that
priceless commodity is compromised”. When I became Chief Judge in
2011 I brokered peace between JUSUN and the Executive arm of
Government which lasted until I left office in 2019. The Bar were
able to do their business without hindrance. All High Courts in
Anambra State were air conditioned, allowing court users to work
for long hours in conducive environments. I am yet to be told
another jurisdiction of the High Court in Nigeria which say the
same thing. Magistrate Courts were completely refurbished. At my
60th birthday on 4/7/2015 I received an award of Committed Learned
Friend and Patron of the Bar from Committee of Chairmen and
Secretaries of NBA Anambra State. The beautiful plague was signed
by all the officers at that time. In 2017 when I increased the
Judicial Divisions from 7 to 10, the Chairman of Chairmen of the
Bar branches, broke protocol and called the entire Bar to be
upstanding and bow to the Chief Judge at the legal year ceremonies
of 2017/2018 legal year. Thereat they collectively gave me the
cognomen of The Shepherd of the Judiciary. History would contain a
fuller chronicle of all that transpired in my time on Bench as
Chief Judge and my efforts to lift the Bar.

Can you share with us the case that gave you the
greatest challenge and test your professional competence and how
did you manage to?

The case in Charge No. HN/5C/95, The State v Onuegbu and Anor in
which

judgement was delivered on 20/7/2001 by Umeadi J (as he then
was) at the High Court Nnewi, unreported, come to mind. The matter
began denovo on 16/6/97. The particulars of the offence were that
the 1st and 2nd defendant wife and daughter to the deceased
respectively on or about 23/3/90 at Abubor Nnewichi Nnewi in Nnewi
Judicial Division unlawfully liked the deceased (husband and father
to the 1st and 2nd defendants respectively).From the evidence at
the trial the man was wont to send live chicken to 1^st
defendant to make chicken pepper soup which the deceased would eat
on return from the market. On this day he returned and the chicken
pepper soup was not ready. The 1st defendant said the little boy
who brought the chicken home did not tie it properly so the chicken
freed itself and ran off. The 1^st defendant, the little
boy and other persons joined in chasing the chicken and by the time
it was caught it was late which accounts for the meal not being
ready on time. The deceased and 1st defendant entered in an
argument which degenerated into a fight. It was said that the 2nd
defendant joined the fight. The deceased fell on the ground and he
was taken to the hospital where he died after ten days. The
Principal Medical Officer with the State Ministry of Health posted
to the General Hospital at the time issued a report on post mortem
findings and gave evidence as PW4 part of which was summed up thus
inter alia… “The medical doctor Pw4 gave evidence that on
examination of the corpse, he found lineal bruises on the posterior
and anterior aspect of the head of the deceased. PW4 stated that in
his opinion the injuries must have been caused by the deceased
being beaten either with a metallic object leading to sub-dural
hemorrhage. That as a result the deceased would have died of either
pain or increased inter-cranial pressure. PW4 admitted in cross
examination that if a man falls with that part of the body hitting
against a metallic object or strong wooden object the same lineal
bruises will occurs depending the distance of the fall. In
re-examination however PW4 clarifies that one fall by a man could
not give rise to lineal bruises in posterior and anterior-aspects
of the head at one and the same time.

I accepted as credible the evidence of the medical doctor PW4
and I believe in the opinion he gave as the cause of death of the
deceased. In fact there is no contrary opinion as to the cause of
death of the deceased”. There was PW1 whose evidence was summed
thus inter alia “It is the evidence of PW1 that on 12/3/90 she saw
the 1st and 2nd accused persons fighting the deceased. That she PW1
saw 1st accused first hitting the deceased on the forehead with an
object. Then on one of those hitting the deceased held onto the
object and the blow from the object landed on the left shoulder of
the deceased. Then the object fell off the hand of the 1st accused
person and was picked up by the 2nd accused person who started
hitting the deceased with the same object at the back of the head.
PW1 went on to testify that from where she was she saw the deceased
fall down from those beating. At this point PW1 said she came down
from the balcony of the two storey building where she observed all
she said and came into the compound of the deceased. That while PW1
was in the compound of the deceased she saw that 1st accused person
was with gallon containing palm wine which she was spraying on the
fallen deceased. That 1st and 2nd accused persons were also pouring
water on the deceased where he lay. Then PW1 started shouting and
people gathered and helped the deceased to a seat. At this time PW1
said she left the scene of the incident for a while.” The evidence
of PW1 was the only eye witness of the incident and was subject of
fierce attack from the defence from diverse angles. The monkey
wrench was thrown in this manner. The Police Inspector who was a
corporal in the team that investigated the matter since 1990 turned
up at the trial to give evidence for the 1st and 2nd accused person
as DW1 against the prosecution. He abandoned the head of the
investigating team who testified for the prosecution as PW6. PW6 at
the time said that it was the DW1 in 1990 who recommended that the
1st accused be charged to court for manslaughter. The sole aim of
this switch was to mar the evidence of PW1 the only eye witness to
the incident. This development led the prosecution to apply for a
visit to the locus in quo which the defense opposed but which the
Court allowed. After the visit to the locus in quo, the parties
reassembled in court and gave evidence of what transpired at the
locus in quo. The judgement was summed up as follows inter alia. “I
think the feet of clay of DW1 was exposed when he unsuccessfully
tried to put a building on the space of the “german floor” on the
date of the investigation where it was not there as I have shown.
DW1 continually boasted that he conducted almost the entire
investigation, but went on to puncture himself by quickly adding,
he did so under the supervision of PW6. The visit to the locus in
quo opened my eyes that PW6 was physically there and monitored the
DW1 as if he had the premonition that DW1 will appear on a
different side of the barn. DW1 must have been of the impression
that contradiction coming from one of the investigating team would
be capable of creating doubt and having the matter decided in
favour of the accused persons. He must know by now that he was
mistaken. The Police are not part of the crime. The Police come in
after the crime to investigate except in preemptive instance. No
matter what one does, crime has a way of leaving its own clues. In
this instance the unobstructed view of PW1, the evidence of PW4 the
medical doctor and the evidence of PW6 Chief Vincent Agbo, retired
Inspector of Police who kept the faith are enough in my mind to
establish the guilt of the 1st and 2^nd accused persons.
I think that DW1 is not a witness of truth. As I have said earlier,
on what basis would even the 1st accused person be recommended for
trial for manslaughter by DW1 without the favourable statement of
PW1. How could a Police Officer who gave evidence under oath that
he recommended that an accused person be charged for manslaughter
come against the witness whose statement could only have given rise
to his initial conclusion. DW1 is no more than a turn coat. Let him
continue to get his rapid promotion and maybe it is people of his
like that will never allow Nigerian Police Force to be reformed for
good. I disbelieve the evidence of DW1.” It was held that the
prosecution proved the charge against 1st & 2^nd accused
persons beyond reasonable doubt and 1st & 2nd accused were found
guilty as charged and convicted. The work in this tortuous case did
not end with the verdict. The offence for manslaughter is defined
at Section 272 of the Criminal Code, Laws of Anambra State 1991.
This definition stems from Section 270 of the Criminal Code
(supra). The penalty for the offence of manslaughter is to be found
at Section 279 of the Criminal Code and it is imprisonment for
life. After the allocutus, I took cognizance of the fact that the
2nd accused was a minor of 15 years old on the date the crime was
committed though she was 24 years old when she gave evidence. I
called up PW3 in open court and had a lengthy talk with him. He
first accepted that 2nd accused was his half-sister and both PW3
and 2nd accused are children of the deceased. I reasoned that it
would be a double loss for one family when their father is deceased
and his half sister be sent to prison. That at her age a prison
term would ravage the remainder of her adult life. He accepted to
take 2nd accused back and take care for her as the new head of the
family. Bolstered by the compassion and charity of PW3, the 1st
accused was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment without option of
fine. The 2nd accused was given an option of fine which was paid in
lieu of her prison term. With due modesty that conformed with the
good law on sentencing. See also 2 Samuel 14:4-11.

How did you feel arriving at judgments in cases
that had capital or the maximum price as
sanctions?

Judges ought not have attachment to case before them other than
doing their duty, which is applying the law to facts which in
criminal matters have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. “If
conviction is to be, the prosecution must prove the case beyond
reasonable doubt” Woolmington VDPP (1935) AC 462 per, Viscount
Sankey. The parties have a right of appeal from the court below.
Again it should not be the concern of the Judge what happens to the
matter on appeal except to keep tab. All concern and industry
should be invested during the trial to apply the rule of law. One
of the aspects of the rule of law thrown up in Woolmington’s case
is that the burden of proof never shifts in criminal cases but
remain with the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt, the
guilt of the accused person. On the front page of Vanguard
Newspaper of Tuesday November 24 2009 was the headline “Rule of law
hinders ex-governors trial, say EFCC”. The story says “The EFCC has
bemoaned the strict adoption of the rule of law mantra by the
Federal Government, lamenting that former governors and other
political –exposed person, were hiding under it to dodge trial” How
untrue! The rationale to tread carefully in criminal trials have
been espoused from a very long time. In 1748 Voltaire wrote of “the
great principle that it is better to run the risk of sparing the
guilty man than to condemn the innocent” At about the same time
Blackstone noted approvingly “the law holds that it is better that
ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer” See Article by
Reiman and Haag on Cambridge Core on the subject. Elsewhere I put
the issue thus inter alia “ I respectfully recommend that all the
three arms of government in all tiers in Nigeria ought to go back
and read Lakanmi’s case judgement. The EFCC, ICPC, Nigeria Police,
the Presidential Advisory Committee against Corruption, the
Nigerian Bar Association and indeed all personages in this hall
ought to read this judgement again. It was about fighting
corruption and the Supreme Court took sides with the rule of law
which translate to justice according to law. The rule of law
connotes observation of the rules. It could not function without
civility. Law enforcement often get impatient and sometimes
frustrated with what they term the slow pace of bringing justice
against those who have been charged with crime. The hexameter first
issued by an unknown poet, then quoted by Sextus Empiricus and then
by Plutarch would suffice as follows “The millstones of the gods,
grind late, but they grind fine” It does not call for any feelings
because “punishment is an obligation to do justice”. See Reiman and
Haag: Cambridge Core. (supra)

Why did you decide to go into lecturing when you
retired from the Bench? How do feel at the level of your students
at the highest echelon of the judiciary?

It is said that when one retires and go to sleep the brain goes
to sleep and one dies. It is recommended that on retirement one
engages with something to keep up the pace of work he was used to
even if on a milder tone. Section 6 (3), (4) and (5) of the
Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007 (as
amended) stipulate thus “(3) A judicial officer who has retired
shall not practice as an advocate in any court of law or judicial
tribunal in Nigeria. (4) A judicial officer who has retired shall
not sign pleading in any court (5) A judicial officer who has
retired may continue to use the word “Justice” aspart of his name.”
The provisions are clear. In the area of law practice a retired
judge may set up only a consultancy on legal matters and his name
would not appear in any of the work he does. I applied to the
Faculty of Law University of Nigeria at Enugu Campus, my alma
mater, for a space to assist in lecturing at the Law Faculty. That
move was warmly received and it was a pleasant surprise to me when
I received a contract appointment from University appointing me a
Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Law. I resumed work on the
27/3/2019. I was posted to the Department of Private Law. My Head
of Department posted me to teach Legal Clinic and Moot Practice. I
have specifically taken up the now rechristened “Rules of
Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007 reflected through
case law” which I discuss the 56 Sections therein. What I do is
that I search for case law which have treated the 56 sections of
Rules spread in A,B,C,D,E,F,G chapters. I give credit to my
LawPavilion Prime App which allow me to work and search out the
matching legal authorities. My Head of Department hopes that the
lessons notes should be put in a print form. I have so far taught 2
classes in 2 semesters. We stopped in February 2020 when ASUU
strike erupted again. Thereafter Covid-19 lock down took over and
nine months since we have been at home. The students are well
behaved. My first lecture on Legal Ethics was at the Justice Mary
Peter Odili Auditorium at UNEC at which many classes were allowed
to attend. Over 250 students were seated. On that day, in my
one-hour lecture there was pin drop silence. That impressed me a
great deal. I would say that the serenity of a court room is one of
the aspects of my work in the Judiciary that I miss. I must confess
that when I began to take single classes after that first lecture
the classroom noises and murmurs returned and these could be
distracting. Again in that I have quickly adjusted. The pole
position of a judge nay Chief Judge is gone. This is a citadel of
learning, all things should be clearly explained and understood.
The real aspect is that as a teacher it is your duty to make
yourself understood. Albert Einstein said that “if you can’t
explain it simply, you do not understand it well enough” In the
Department of Private law, we have also improved on our capacity to
teach moot court practice by assembling the needed books and
materials. Many other staff have been engaged in that respect.
Recently our students attended the L’ avocat 3.0. Brief Writing and
Mooting Competition 2019 organized by Kayode Eso Chambers,
University of Lagos. The University of Nigeria, clinched TWO of the
available THREE prizes. Kudos to our Head of Department and
Director of UNN Law Clinic, Dr. T.O. Umahi. I have also been
nominated as a member of the Board of Editorial Advisers of the
Faculty of Law of Godfrey Okoye University
Enugu.

Which of your decisions do you consider to be landmark
or locus classicus that enriched our legal
jurisprudence?

In my time on Bench I wrote many decisions. Time and effort
would be required to go through all of them and determine which
ones enhanced our jurisprudence. For now let me enumerate a few
that are handy.

A) In Suit No. A/1C/2013, Federal Republic of Nigeria v Dr.
Okechukwu Odunze & 7Ors. The 1st, 3rd and 5th defendant applicants
filed a notice of preliminary objection dated 20/3/13 praying for
the following (1) an order striking out or quashing the charge
contained in Charge No A/1C/2013 levelled against the 1st, 3rd, and
5th accused person for being incurably defective. (2) an order
striking out or quashing the charges contained in charge on the
following grounds (i) That the charges against 1st, 3rd and
5^th accused persons are founded on a repealed law; The
Corruption Practice and other Related Offences Act No 5 of 2000
repealed by Section 55 of Corrupt Practices and other Related
Offences Act No. 6 of 2003 Cap C31 LFN 2004.

(ii) That the alleged offences committed by the 1st, 3rd & 5th
accused persons were committed after the abrogation of the Corrupt
Practice and other Related Offences Act No. 5 of 2000. In the
ruling delivered on 4/2/2014 by Umeadi CJ (as he then was) it was
stated inter alia “From all I have said above I hold that the CPC
Act No. 5 of 2000 is the extant law. See FRN v Anache 2013 1 1CPCLR
634; Attorney General Ondo v Attorney Federation & Ors 2013 1
ICPCLR P. 254; Olafisoye v FRN (204) 4 NWLR pt. 864 @ P. 580; Suit
FHC/ABT/CS/93/2003 Hon. Bala Kaoje & 4 Ors v The National Assembly
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria & 13 Ors per Egbo Egbo J (as he
then was). A look at both Acts would show that the composition of
their membership are radically different. The CPC Act No. 6 of 2003
stipulates that the Chairman should be a serving Justice of the
Court of Appeal which the current Chairman of ICPC functioning
under the CPC Act No. 5 of 2000 is not. It is an irony therefore
that CPC Act. No. 5 of 2000 is not contained in the Laws Federation
of Nigeria 2004 while the CPC Act No. 6 of 2003 is. That anomaly
should be corrected immediately. The surest pointer to the
recognition of the CPC Act No. 5 of 2000 by the Federal Government
of Nigeria is that they continue to recognize and deal with the
members of the CPC No. 5 of 2000. I further hold that CPC Act No. 6
of 2003 has been voided and nullified and ought not to remain in
the statute books. See Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/93/2003 Hon. Bala Kaije
& 4 Ors v The National Assembly of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
& 13 Ors (supra). Suit No. FCT/HC/CR/44/2010 FRN v Dr. Aboki Zhawa
& Zors (unreported). The preliminary objection of the 1st,3rd and
5th defendants/applicants lack merit and is dismissed. I hereby
make the following orders. (1) The CPC Act No. 5 of 2000 is the
void and subsisting legislation on the matter and ought to be
included in the compiled Laws of Federation of Nigeria (2) The CPC
Act No. 6 of 2003 is null valid and of no effect and ought to be
expunged from the compiled Laws of the Federation of Nigeria. (3)
Pursuant to the meaning at Section 318 of the Constitution of
Nigeria 1999 (as amended) I hereby make a recommendation that the
Hon. Attorney General and Minister for Justice of Nigeria to (i)
include the CPC Act No. 5 of 2000 in the compiled Laws of the
Federation of Nigeria forthwith and (ii) expunge the CPC Act No. 6
of 2003 from the compiled Laws of the Federation of Nigeria,
forthwith.

B) In Suit No. A/182/2016, All Progressive Congress (APC) & 21
Ors v Anambra State Independent Electoral Commission & 28 Ors, The
Plaintiffs by Originating Summons dated 20/4/16 claim the 13
(thirteen) reliefs against the defendants. The judgement delivered
on Thursday 18/9/2017 by Umeadi CJ (as he then was) read inter alia
“The Originating Summons of the 1st to 22nd plaintiffs succeed in
part and I make the following orders. (a)It is hereby declared that
section 7(1) the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999
(as amended), Section 4(1) and Section 59 of the Local Government
Law of Anambra State 1999 (as amended) guarantees the existence of
a democratically elected government in the 21 Local Government
Councils of Anambra State (b)It is hereby declared that Section 208
(2) – (6) as amended (supra) were made in consonance with good
legislative practice to fill a vacuum which may occur in future and
in this case is in tandem with the Constitution of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria 1999(as amended) and was validly made by the
6th defendant and is a competent law to be put into use by the 4th
defendant in appropriate circumstances (c) it is declared that
there is no basis at law and in fact either to declare the 2nd –
22nd plaintiffs as winners of election to the named Local
Government Council in Anambra State or to be issued Certificates of
Return as there were no election held and they were not validly
nominated candidates of a political party as envisaged by Section
64(3) of the Local Government Law of Anambra State 1999(as amended)
(d) It is hereby declared that the appointment of the 9th to 29th
defendants as Chairmen Transition Committee at the expiration of
their tenure as Chairmen of elected Councils on 12/1/2016 by the
4th defendant in the absence of an emergency or such like situation
is wrongful, unconstitutional, Illegal null void and of no effect.
(e) It is hereby ordered that 1st defendant pursuant to Section
64(1) of the Local Government Law 1999 (as amended) appoint a date
within 90 days from today for election into the offices of Chairmen
and Members of the Local Government Councils which became vacant on
12/1/2016.

C) The Petition no. EDGV/EPT/1/07 Comrade Adams Aliyu
Oshiomhole &

Anor v INEC & 21 Ors went on appeal as INEC v Oshiomhole (2009)
4 NWLR

(pt 11 32) 607. “Along the line the Chairman attained the
mandatory age of

65 years, retired from the Judiciary of Kwara State and left the
panel. Surprisingly I was appointed the Chairman. At this time we
had about 18 days left to the time fixed for the judgement in the
gubernatorial election petition. The panel now consisting of Umeadi
J as Chairman (now CJ Anambra State), Tahir J (then) Obande J (now
of the Court of Appeal) and Anjor J (Cross River State Judiciary)
held our mandatory meeting on the judgement of the gubernatorial
election petition. The lot fell on my humble self to write the
judgement which pronounced the petitioner Adams Oshiomhole as the
validly elected Governor of Edo State of Nigeria in the
gubernatorial election of April 2007……… I read that judgement from
a manuscript of 183 pages on Thursday March 20th 2008, which lasted
for

about 6 hours. Later when it was typed it came to 119 pages. The
rest is history” The above quote was taken from “Judgement Writing:
Practical Hints” by Umeadi J (as he then was) p. 241 – 259 of the
book “The Day the Eagle Emerged” (supra). Undoubtedly whatever
accolade emanating from this judgement belong to all us on the
panel equally. However, the exigency of the moment made it that the
other members of the panel heard the full text of the judgement for
the first time when it was read out in the open tribunal. Permit me
to quote from the review on the judgement written by the Rt. Hon.
Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu, OON, SAN, JP, titled “The Day the Eagle
Emerged” which became the name of the book. (supra) at pp 264 – 265
as follows inter alia “The tension was felt not just in Edo State
but even on television all over the country as His Lordship in a
most painstaking manner and with surgical expertise and precision
excised the chaff – the invalid votes – from the grain – the lawful
votes and brought down the only power capable of physically
protecting the arbiters from clear and present danger. The Court of
Appeal in INEC v Oshiomhole (2009) 4 NWLR (part 1132) 607, found no
difficulty in not only endorsing the decision of the Tribunal but
also protected and quoted in extenso the painstaking and serene
findings of fact made and amply supported by well-researched
judicial pronouncement of superior courts. It is exhilarating that
with the dearth of judicial pronouncement of the word “not less
than one quarter of all votes cast…. In the State” as used in
Section 179(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria the Court of Appeal in CA/E/EPT/G/08/2010 and
CA/E/EPT/G/04/2010 resorted to INEC v Oshiomhole (supra) with
particular reference to the efforts of Hon Justice P.N.C. Umeadi,
CJ in the excision of “invalid votes” on which alone viability may
be conferred on a declaration made at an election.”

D) In Suit No. 0/265/2004 Chief (Prof) A.N.A. Modebe & 10 Ors
(for themselves and on behalf of Ikporo Onitsha Co-operatives) v
Igwe Okonkwo of Amansi; Exparte (1) Lazarus Uba (2) Innocent
Iwuagwu, ruling was delivered at High Court Onitsha on 23/7/2004 by
Umeadi J (as he then was) inter alia “Therein it was established
that Section 7(5) of the Constitution (supra) refer to the 4th
Schedule where functions conferred by law upon Local Government
Councils are set out in parts. Section 1(e) of the 4^th
Schedule (supra) set out one of the main functions of the Local
Government as follows, establishment, maintenance and regulation of
slaughter houses, slaughter slabs, markets, motor parts and public
conveniences. It is clear that from the passage quoted above that
the Anambra State Government does not have the power to establish
or maintain or regulate the market at Ose Okwodu market Onitsha.
That duty would fall upon the Local Government under whose
jurisdiction the market in situate …. I respectfully say that the
law as enunciated by the Supreme Court in Knight Frank & Rutley v
Attorney General of Kano State (1998) NLR page 19 is still the good
law on the issue. In this instance the effect of the Constitution
is undiluted as the Section 1(e) relevant here stand on its own and
does not need any enabling law from Anambra State to come to life.
It is a constitutional provision pure and simple and being the
supreme law it takes its force, effect and power instantly. I
therefore hold that from all I have said above that the Anambra
State Government did not have the power to make Exhibit 3 attached
to the affidavit in support. In effect the Anambra State Government
through her Hon. Commissioner for Special Utilities acted ultra
vires when it made Exhibit 3 on 5/4/2004. I hold that Exhibit 3 is
null and void and of no effect. I am therefore not able now to make
the Attorney General of Anambra State a part in this suit to
represent the State as there is nothing in the subject matter of
this suit which directly concerns or connects the Anambra State
Government.”

Finally, you joined the All Progressives Grand Alliance
(APGA) last year do you have an interest in politics, what is your
interest

Yes, After I retired from the Judiciary I joined the All
Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA). In Nigeria, the democratic
dispensation is hinged on political parties. There is no provision
for independent candidates. Any person who wishes to contest for
any political position could only do so through any of the
registered political parties. I intend to seek the ticket of APGA
to contest the election for President of Federal Republic of
Nigeria in 2023.