Metuh loses bid to stall trial

It was a bad day at the court yesterday for the spokesman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Olisa Metuh, as he failed in efforts to stall proceedings in his trial, following which Justice Okon Abang ordered him to open his defence on Monday, failing which he will lose the opportunity.

Metuh and his company, Destra Investment limited, are being tried before the Federal High Court, Abuja for unlawfully receiving N400m from the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) and engaging in money laundering.

Olisa Metuh in Court

Yesterday, Justice Abang, in a series of rulings, rejected all applications by Metuh and Destra, which the judge said were only intended to stall proceedings in the case. Yesterday’s proceedings lasted for about seven hours (from 9am to after 4pm).

At a point, Metuh, who had complained that he was not allowed to sit in court, pleaded with the court to allow him walk for some minutes, having sat for a long time. The proceedings were later suspended about 10 minutes in view of Metuh’s request.

The first ruling was on a motion in which the defendants urged the judge to disqualify himself from further presiding over the case and refer it back to the Chief Judge for reassignment to another judge.

The defendants hinged the motion on their claim, among others, that the judge had exhibited bias in his handling of the case. They had made similar allegations in a petition to the court’s Chief Judge, Justice Ibrahim Auta, which Justice Auta rejected and directed Justice Abang to continue to hear the case.

Dismissing the motion yesterday, Justice Abang upheld the argument by the prosecution lawyer, Sylvanus Tahir, to the effect that the defendants failed to provide sufficient facts to support their claim that the judge was biased.

The judge also refused another motion by Metuh and his company, praying the court to adjourn the case indefinitely, pending the determination of an application for stay of proceedings which they filed before the Court of Appeal, Abuja.

In refusing the application, the judge held that such prayer would have been granted in deference to the Court of Appeal, if the case was a civil one.

He was of the view that the case, being a criminal one, the extant law regulating criminal proceedings in the country – the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015 frowns at such interlocutory (mid-proceedings) adjournment with its provision in Section 306.

The judge also noted that there was no order by the Court of Appeal staying proceedings before his court and that, by virtue of the provision of Section 306 of the ACJA, it would be wrong for the court to grant such adjournment.

Justice Abang equally rejected some other oral applications for adjournment made by lawyers to Metuh and his company.

One of such application was by Tochukwu Onwugbufor (SAN) who urged the court to adjourn the case on the grounds that he was briefed the previous day to represent Metuh’s company, even when both Metuh and his company were, before yesterday, jointly represented by a team of lawyers made up of five Senior Advocates.

Onwugbufor, at the commencement of proceedings, urged the court to adjourn to enable him apply and receive records of proceedings in the case, to familiarise himself with the case, to receive proper briefing from his client and to allow him sufficient time to prepare for his client’s defence.

He argued that it was the right of his client to be accorded all the necessary facilities, including sufficient time to enable him prepare his defence.

The Senior Advocate complained that the Court’s Registrar and prosecution lawyer refused to accept the letter he brought to court yesterday, seeking adjournment on the ground that he was just briefed.

Responding, prosecution lawyer, Sylvanus Tahir argued that the team of lawyers representing the defendants have failed to comply with the condition precedent, as provided in Section 349(7) and (8) of the ACJA to qualify Onwugbufor to appear in the case as a new lawyer for Destra.

He argued that by the provision, a lawyer withdrawing from a case is required to inform the court at least, three days before the next hearing date.

“Section 349 (7) & (8) of the ACJA provides for how a counsel in a matter should conduct his case and procedure for disengagement.

“Up till now, there is no such notice of disengagement from the firms of the five Senior Advocates, namely Onyechi Ikpeazu, Chris Uche, Ifedayo Adedipe, Emeka Etiaba and Goody Uche, who have been representing the defendants from inception.

“There is no notice of withdrawal by any of the lawyers mentioned either in group or individually. If such letter exists, it has not been served on the prosecution. Rather than comply with the law, we are told that a counsel, seeking to come in, who has not properly been allowed in, is writing for an adjournment.

“Without complying with Section 349(7)(8), this court cannot take cognisance of the presence of Onwugbufor SAN,” Tahir said.

On Onwugbufor’s argument that refusing his application for adjournment would amount to denial of fair hearing, Tahir argued that that issue does not arise.

“Fair hearing envisaged in the Constitution is to a party in the case and not to his counsel, who seeks to come in at the 11th hour, without following due procedure.

“Right from the inception of this case, no party has been denied fair hearing. The defendants have not claimed that proceedings were conducted in a language they do not understand.

“There is no complaint that they have been denied the right to legal representation. In fact they have a consortium of five Senior Advocates and a legion of junior lawyers representing them.

“The requirement of fair hearing by the Constitution has been observed to the letter in this case. We were last in court on March 24. Between then and now, if the 2nd defendant, which is an entity owned by the 1st defendant (Metuh), had wished to disengage its lawyer, it has enough time to have done that.”

He urged the court to refuse the application for adjournment, a request the judge, in his ruling upheld and refused to adjourn on the strength of Onwugbufor’s application.

Following the judge’s last ruling, rejecting his plea for adjournment, Onwugbufor refused to sit down, insisting the judge must hear his last submission. He was still standing when the judge, who ordered Metuh and his company to open their defence by calling their witnesses, later adjourned to Monday, April 11 (for the defence to open its case).

Although the case involving former Chief of Defence staff, Alex Badeh, was later called, trial could not go on because of time constraint. The judge adjourned the case to April 12.

Metuh loses bid to stall trial

Nigerian government vows to jail corrupt judges, seize stolen assets

By NIcholas Ibekwe

Nigeria’s Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Abubakar Malami, said in Lagos on Tuesday that judges found to have corruptly enriched themselves would be prosecuted, jailed and would lose to the state any asset they acquired with such stolen funds.

Mr. Malami, who was the special guest at the launch of a report by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) titled, “Go home and sin no more: Corrupt judges escaping from justice in Nigeria”, said judges should be beyond reproach.

“Considering the pivotal role that they play in the administration of justice, it is important to ensure that Nigerian judges, like the proverbial Caesar’s wife, are beyond reproach or even suspicion. Gone are the days when corrupt judges escaped from justice in Nigeria!”

“I can assure you today that in line with the cardinal agenda of President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration, the office of the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation shall ensure that every appearance of corruption in the judiciary is dealt among other measures through criminal prosecution and forfeiture to the State of illegally acquired assets,” he said.

The minister was represented at the launch by his senior special assistant, Abiodun Aikomo.

He added that the Buhari administration would not tolerate judicial impunity and would do everything within the law to ensure that judicial accountability in “a corruption-free judiciary which is both independent and impartial”.

“The judiciary’s one and only mandate should be to deliver justice without fear or favour, affection or ill-will. The world over, the rule of law, and separation of powers which are inseparable components of a democratic government, presupposes the existence of an independent and impartial judiciary,” he said.

He said judges found to have been corrupt were removed in the past by the National Judicial Council.

“In reality, on a comparison between the widely reported cases of corruption in the Judiciary vis-à-vis the records of judicial officers who have actually been punished therefore, it would appear as if Nigerian judges enjoy total immunity from prosecution for corruption (and allied offences), whereas judges are not immune from discipline for any misdeed let alone for corruption,” he said.

SERAP executive director, Adetokunbo Mumuni, who welcomed Mr. Malami’s commitment, said corrupt judges are more dangerous to the society than corrupt politicians because a corrupt judiciary denies both victims of corruption and those accused of corruption access to an independent, impartial and fair adjudication process.

Mr. Mumuni explained that the report advocated the prosecution of corrupt judges; referral by the Chief Justice of the Federation and the National Judicial Council of all cases of judicial corruption to appropriate anti-corruption agencies; publication and auditing of spending by the judiciary; public and periodic disclosure of assets by the Chief Justice of Nigeria and all other judges.

The report also recommended that retired judges should be allowed to lead the National Judicial Council to improve its independence; and urgent investigation of allegations of age falsification among judges by the National Judicial Council.

The report also called on the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to proactively and robustly use their statutory powers to investigate and prosecute judicial corruption and to request from the National Judicial Council files on cases of corrupt judges for prosecution.

Nigerian government vows to jail corrupt judges, seize stolen assets

Buhari approves 30 new Federal High Court judges’ appointments

• Appointees to be sworn-in Wednesday

President Muhammadu Buhari has approved the appointment of the Chief Registrar of the Federal High Court, Mrs. Rosemary O. Dugbo Oghoghorie and 29 others as judges of the Federal High Court.

Their appointment by the President was on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council (NJC).

NJC’s Acting Director of Information, Soji Oye, said in a statement that the new judges will be sworn-in by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, in Abuja on Wednesday next week.

Mrs. Dugbo Oghoghorie is taking the slot of Delta State; Yellin S. Bogoro (Bauchi State), Taiwo Obayomi Taiwo (Ogun State), Ibrahim Watila (Borno State), Mallong Peter Hoommuk (Plateau State), Isa Hamma Adama Dashen (Adamawa State), Hassan Dikko (Kebbi State), Jude Kanyioh Dagat (Kaduna State), Olayinka Olusegun Tokode (Osun State) and Simon Akpah Amobeda (Kogi State).

Others are Jane Egienanwan Inyang (Cross River State), Daniel Emeka Osiagor (Rivers State), Prof. Chuka Austine Obiozor (Anambra State), Iniekenimi Nicholas Oweib (Bayelsa State), Hassan Muslim Sule (Zamfara State), Hadiza Rabiu Shagari (Sokoto State), Saleh Kogo Idrissa (Yobe State), Joyce Obehi Abdulmalik (Edo State) and Hillary Ide Osho Oshomah (Edo State).

Also included are Fadima Murtala Aminu (Adamawa State), Toyin Bolaji Adegoke (Kwara State), James Kolawole Omotosho (Ogun State), Nehizena Idemudia Ekunwe (Edo State), Stephen Daylop Pam (Plateau State), Akintayo Aluko ( Ekiti State), Dr. Nnamdi O. Dimgba (Abia State), Emeka Nwite (Ebonyi State), Abdulazeez M.Z. Anka (Zamfara State), Abdu Dogo (FCT) and Adamu Turaki Muhammed (Jigawa State).

Buhari approves 30 new Federal High Court judges’ appointments

Buhari blames corrupt judges of frustrating efforts to recover stolen assets

ABUJA — President Muhammadu Buhari, yesterday, descended on the judiciary, saying the overall levels of judicial service delivery in the county still leave much to be desired.

President Buhari

President Buhari said he was perturbed that more than ever before, “allegations of judicial corruption have become more strident and frequent.”

Flagging-off the 2015 All Nigeria Judges’ Conference  in Abuja,  yesterday, Buhari, who was represented by Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, SAN, accused corrupt lawyers and judges of sabotaging his efforts to recover stolen assets.

He said: “Further on point of negative perception, there is both local and international dissatisfaction with the long delays in the trial process. In the past few years, this has become especially so for high-profile cases of corruption, especially where they involve serving or former political office holders.

“As my lords are undoubtedly aware, corruption transfers from public coffers to private pockets, resources required to deliver social and economic justice.

“Government’s attempts to recover such assets in accordance with the law are often faced with dilatory tactics by lawyers sometimes with the apparent collusion of judges.

“These tactics are often not directed at reaching any conclusion or affirming innocence or guilt, but at stalling trials indefinitely, thus denying the state and the accused person the opportunity of a judicial verdict. I wish to echo the sentiments of the vast majority of Nigerians in saying that we cannot afford to continue on this path.”

 

Urges total reform of the sector

 

President Buhari, while urging a total reform of the Justice sector, said he was not unmindful of the fact that  delays or outright inaction in some high-profile corruption cases are the consequences of shoddy investigations, outmoded rules of procedure, poor prosecution or unprofessional practices of defence counsel.

He, however, maintained that the judiciary must play its role in ensuring that its internal processes are promptly improved and made ready to expedite trials.

“Delay in judicial processes has cost our economy dearly in terms of much needed investment, as investors prefer other jurisdictions where the progress of court cases is such more predictable and in accordance with the rule of law. Being able to reverse this trend is largely dependent on the efficiency and effectiveness of a justice system.

“Unfortunately, our justice system currently has a reputation for delays, usually occasioned by a combination of endless adjournments, incessant interlocutory applications and overwhelming caseloads. This situation is a huge disincentive for businesses.

“It is not surprising, therefore, that Nigeria ranks near bottom on the ease of doing business index. We are currently ranked 143 out of 189 countries by the World Bank Group’s Enforcing Contracts Indicator.

“Delays in the trial process have damaged the international reputation of the Nigerian Judiciary, even amongst its international peers.

“In pursuing its internal reforms, and without prejudice to the recognition that should be given to the disposal of high profile cases, the Judiciary must always remember that one of its key roles is the promotion of equity and social justice, all persons are equal under the law.

“Judicial reforms must take into consideration the need to clean up the systems and processes in our magistrate and district courts and all other lower courts across the country which handle matters involving th e poor and the less-privileged.

“Together with the Police stations, these courts constitute the only interface between the less-privileged  and the Justice system. Our justice sector reforms must, therefore, seek to position and portray these court as humane and efficient.

“I have to admit that reforming the current system must extend beyond the judiciary and necessarily include reviewing laws, institutions, processes and procedures that inhibit speedy justice delivery. We must also re-orientate and improve the attitude of legal practitioners and the legal profession in general.

Sanctioning of lawyers

“Judges must not be weak or appear to be weak in sanctioning lawyers and litigants who deliberately stall and frustrate the judicial process.

“I have consistently declared that this administration is committed to the rule of law and that no one will be related above the law of the land. As the rich and powerful claim legal rights before the courts, we must remember that the poor also deserve social and economic justice.

“This is why our government is determined to fulfil key planks of our campaign promises, as they relate to the provision of social welfare programs in aid of the poor.”

Pledging to improve the welfare of judges, Buhari stressed that the current economic reality requires modest use of resources to achieve great changes.

CJN blames it on poor funding

Earlier, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, blamed the seeming low performance of the judiciary on underfunding.

He harped on need for fiscal and physical independence of the Nigeria judiciary, saying:  “In a country where an arm of government is appropriated with less than one percent of the national budget, it is difficult to refer to our judiciary as being truly independent.”

According to the CJN,  “the constitution prescribes the institutional independence of the judiciary under Section 6 of its provisions. Sections 121 (3) and 162 (9) further guarantee fiscal independence for the judiciary, a fact now acknowledged by the other arms of Government with recent resolutions by the Federal and some State Governments to pay the judiciary its outstanding and future budgetary allocations as and when due.

“However, under the circumstances, the state Judiciaries continue to encounter a further burden of facing difficulties in accessing these paltry funds from their executives in order to function.”

The CJN  said the Executive and Legislature should take into cognizance the fact that judicial independence is key in any democratic setting.

“It is this independence that gives credibility to the scales of justice and allows our citizens to rest assured that justice is indeed not for sale.

“For this reason, I call on the heads of other Arms of Government, in the spirit of the cooperation between us, to support the judiciary’s existence and I can assure you that it will flourish and grow”, he added.

In her  welcome address, the Administrator of the National Judicial Institute, Hon Justice Rosaline Bozimo (rtd) said the conference which has the theme  ‘The Judiciary as a veritable instrument for sustaining Democracy in Nigeria’, would provide a veritable platform for judges to strategise on how to meet challenges in the dispensation of justice to all.

“The Biennial Conference has always been a stock taking event when Judges from all over the country converge to reflect on their activities over a period of time, thereby providing an insight into what has been achieved.

“It also provides a platform to strategise on how to meet the important and critical challenges in the dispensation of justice to all in our great Country”, she added.

Buhari blames corrupt judges of frustrating efforts to recover stolen assets

Buhari blames corrupt judges of frustrating efforts to recover stolen assets

ABUJA — President Muhammadu Buhari, yesterday, descended on the judiciary, saying the overall levels of judicial service delivery in the county still leave much to be desired.

President Buhari

President Buhari said he was perturbed that more than ever before, “allegations of judicial corruption have become more strident and frequent.”

Flagging-off the 2015 All Nigeria Judges’ Conference  in Abuja,  yesterday, Buhari, who was represented by Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, SAN, accused corrupt lawyers and judges of sabotaging his efforts to recover stolen assets.

He said: “Further on point of negative perception, there is both local and international dissatisfaction with the long delays in the trial process. In the past few years, this has become especially so for high-profile cases of corruption, especially where they involve serving or former political office holders.

“As my lords are undoubtedly aware, corruption transfers from public coffers to private pockets, resources required to deliver social and economic justice.

“Government’s attempts to recover such assets in accordance with the law are often faced with dilatory tactics by lawyers sometimes with the apparent collusion of judges.

“These tactics are often not directed at reaching any conclusion or affirming innocence or guilt, but at stalling trials indefinitely, thus denying the state and the accused person the opportunity of a judicial verdict. I wish to echo the sentiments of the vast majority of Nigerians in saying that we cannot afford to continue on this path.”

 

Urges total reform of the sector

 

President Buhari, while urging a total reform of the Justice sector, said he was not unmindful of the fact that  delays or outright inaction in some high-profile corruption cases are the consequences of shoddy investigations, outmoded rules of procedure, poor prosecution or unprofessional practices of defence counsel.

He, however, maintained that the judiciary must play its role in ensuring that its internal processes are promptly improved and made ready to expedite trials.

“Delay in judicial processes has cost our economy dearly in terms of much needed investment, as investors prefer other jurisdictions where the progress of court cases is such more predictable and in accordance with the rule of law. Being able to reverse this trend is largely dependent on the efficiency and effectiveness of a justice system.

“Unfortunately, our justice system currently has a reputation for delays, usually occasioned by a combination of endless adjournments, incessant interlocutory applications and overwhelming caseloads. This situation is a huge disincentive for businesses.

“It is not surprising, therefore, that Nigeria ranks near bottom on the ease of doing business index. We are currently ranked 143 out of 189 countries by the World Bank Group’s Enforcing Contracts Indicator.

“Delays in the trial process have damaged the international reputation of the Nigerian Judiciary, even amongst its international peers.

“In pursuing its internal reforms, and without prejudice to the recognition that should be given to the disposal of high profile cases, the Judiciary must always remember that one of its key roles is the promotion of equity and social justice, all persons are equal under the law.

“Judicial reforms must take into consideration the need to clean up the systems and processes in our magistrate and district courts and all other lower courts across the country which handle matters involving th e poor and the less-privileged.

“Together with the Police stations, these courts constitute the only interface between the less-privileged  and the Justice system. Our justice sector reforms must, therefore, seek to position and portray these court as humane and efficient.

“I have to admit that reforming the current system must extend beyond the judiciary and necessarily include reviewing laws, institutions, processes and procedures that inhibit speedy justice delivery. We must also re-orientate and improve the attitude of legal practitioners and the legal profession in general.

Sanctioning of lawyers

“Judges must not be weak or appear to be weak in sanctioning lawyers and litigants who deliberately stall and frustrate the judicial process.

“I have consistently declared that this administration is committed to the rule of law and that no one will be related above the law of the land. As the rich and powerful claim legal rights before the courts, we must remember that the poor also deserve social and economic justice.

“This is why our government is determined to fulfil key planks of our campaign promises, as they relate to the provision of social welfare programs in aid of the poor.”

Pledging to improve the welfare of judges, Buhari stressed that the current economic reality requires modest use of resources to achieve great changes.

CJN blames it on poor funding

Earlier, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, blamed the seeming low performance of the judiciary on underfunding.

He harped on need for fiscal and physical independence of the Nigeria judiciary, saying:  “In a country where an arm of government is appropriated with less than one percent of the national budget, it is difficult to refer to our judiciary as being truly independent.”

According to the CJN,  “the constitution prescribes the institutional independence of the judiciary under Section 6 of its provisions. Sections 121 (3) and 162 (9) further guarantee fiscal independence for the judiciary, a fact now acknowledged by the other arms of Government with recent resolutions by the Federal and some State Governments to pay the judiciary its outstanding and future budgetary allocations as and when due.

“However, under the circumstances, the state Judiciaries continue to encounter a further burden of facing difficulties in accessing these paltry funds from their executives in order to function.”

The CJN  said the Executive and Legislature should take into cognizance the fact that judicial independence is key in any democratic setting.

“It is this independence that gives credibility to the scales of justice and allows our citizens to rest assured that justice is indeed not for sale.

“For this reason, I call on the heads of other Arms of Government, in the spirit of the cooperation between us, to support the judiciary’s existence and I can assure you that it will flourish and grow”, he added.

In her  welcome address, the Administrator of the National Judicial Institute, Hon Justice Rosaline Bozimo (rtd) said the conference which has the theme  ‘The Judiciary as a veritable instrument for sustaining Democracy in Nigeria’, would provide a veritable platform for judges to strategise on how to meet challenges in the dispensation of justice to all.

“The Biennial Conference has always been a stock taking event when Judges from all over the country converge to reflect on their activities over a period of time, thereby providing an insight into what has been achieved.

“It also provides a platform to strategise on how to meet the important and critical challenges in the dispensation of justice to all in our great Country”, she added.

Buhari blames corrupt judges of frustrating efforts to recover stolen assets

Judges’ absence stalls hearing in Dasuki, Oronsaye cases

The absence of the judges involved in the trial of former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki and ex-Head of Head of Service of the Federation, Steve Oronsaye stalled proceedings in both cases on Wednesday.

Former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki

The judges – Justices Gabriel Kolawole and Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja – were said to be attending the court’s annual judges’ conference outside Abuja.

Court officials have however fixed next Monday (November 2) for further hearing in the case involving Dasuki, while that of Oronsaye was fixed for November 3.

On October 26 when the Dasuki case last came up, Justice Ademola adjourned to Wednesday for ruling on the application by the prosecution for the trial to be conducted in secret.

The judge also picked Wednesday for ruling on the defence’s application for the release of Dasuki’s travel documents, which he submitted to the court after he was granted bail on self recognition.

Dasuki, who was earlier arraigned on a one-count charge of illegal arms possession, was re-arraigned on October 26 on an amended five-count charge of illegal arms possession and money laundering.

Oronsaye, Osarenkhoe Afe and a limited liability company – Fredrick Hamilton Global Services Limited – were arraigned on a 24-count charge in July this year for alleged fraud and money laundering offences involving N1.2 billion.

Justice Kolawole, before who they were arraigned, granted Oronsaye bail on self-recognition.

On October 5, Justice Kolawole fixed October 28 for the commencement of trial.

Judges’ absence stalls hearing in Dasuki, Oronsaye cases

CJN to judges: Don’t truncate democracy

1

By Ikechukwu Nnochiri

ABUJA— As the nation prepares for the general elections this month, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, yesterday handed down a serious warning to all judicial officers in the country saying ‘judiciary must never again be used as tool to truncate our democracy’.

The CJN gave the warning while swearing-in the 242 judges who have been selected to serve as chairmen and members of the 2015 Election Petition Tribunals. He also cautioned them not to accept gifts or engage in illicit communication with politicians or their lawyers.

Swearing-in the tribunal members at the Supreme Court, yesterday, the CJN, said the National Judicial Council, NJC, would not hesitate to deal with any judge who allows himself to be influenced by any interest group.

He urged the tribunal judges to be careful and thorough in the review of the petitions and responses, pleadings, the physical evidence and argument of counsel of the parties that will appear before them.

“You must ensure that all petitions must be founded upon grounds which are contained in section 138 of the Electoral Act and not on extraneous provisions of law, as the Tribunal is not a court of vain inquisition.

“All your considerations must be founded in law only and not coloured by personal sympathies, opinions or affiliations, remembering that there is a resonance to the truism that the Judiciary is ‘the last hope of the common man’, and may I add, also the hope of the not so common man”, the CJN said.

He added: “Let me use this opportunity to sound a note of warning to all judicial officers. Do not allow any political party or politician to compromise your integrity or your future.

“We must never again be used as tools to truncate our nation’s democracy. I assure you that any judge found wanting would only have him or herself to blame as the NJC will definitely not spare the rod in ensuring that the honour, respect and independence of the Judiciary is protected.

“As you start your assignment, I must reiterate that while you are on the tribunals, you will be looked upon as the embodiment of this ideal of justice. To that end, you must be the dispensers of justice regardless of fear or favour, position or standing.

 

Uphold stability of democracy

“You must uphold the stability of this democracy by stamping the hallmark of legality on the conduct of our nation’s elections as it is through your eyes that justice perceives a wrong that must be made right.

“It is, therefore, apt to remind you that your integrity is sacrosanct. There is no alternative to integrity as it is not negotiable. You must ensure that your acts are in strict conformity with the law.

“Therefore, you must shun acts as the acceptance of gifts or favours from counsel and politicians, and the exchange of illicit communications with parties, which acts will erode the integrity of the tribunals irretrievably.”

The CJN equally stressed that the tribunals must strictly adhere to the provision of Section 134 of the Electoral Act which stipulates that all petitions must be filled within 21 days of the declaration of the result of an election.

“You must also bear in mind that Section 285 of the Constitution and Section 134(2) of the Electoral Act 2010, are also clear that all petitions must be heard and judgments rendered in writing and delivered in open court within 180 days of the filing of that petition.

“Any petition presented outside of the statutory time must not be countenanced for any reason.

“Since you all do not have the luxury of time in the discharge of your duties, I urge you all to be pedantic in your deliberations but do not allow ‘red-herring’ technicalities to distract you from the path of justice.

 

Judiciary on trial

“You must listen attentively and enquire appropriately, taking care not to descend into the arena. In addition, it is crucial that you consider all the evidence before you carefully, deliberate conscientiously, and adjudicate swiftly and justly as not only you but the entire judiciary will also be on trial.

“I need not remind you that the Tribunal assignment is very laborious and that you are likely to be overstretched in the handling of election matters. Praises and condemnation will be meted out to you in the course of discharging your duties.

“Unfortunately, some of the condemnations will come from our partners in the temple of justice, i.e. the Bar. I urge you not to be deterred by the uncomplimentary comments of some politicians and litigants anytime judgment is given against them.

“Posterity will judge you on the words that you utter in judgment and my sincere prayer is that we all shall not be judged harshly by history”, the CJN stated.

Section 133(3) (a) and (b) of the Electoral Act 2010, states that Election Petitions Tribunals must be established 14 days prior to the elections. The Secretariat of the Tribunals must be opened seven days before election.

The CJN said the swearing-in of the Election Petition Tribunal members was necessary to enable the Secretariat of the Tribunal in each state of the federation open in accordance with the provision of the Electoral Act.

 

Viewed 1 times
CJN to judges: Don’t truncate democracy

Proposed law disqualifies judges from plea bargain deals

The Administration of Criminal Justice Bill, 2013, which has been passed by the House of Representatives, exempted magistrates and judges from participating in plea bargain arrangements.

This was disclosed in a summary document of the proposed law, which was presented on Thursday at a media briefing organised by the Panel on Justice Reform alongside a non-governmental organisation, Justice for All, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes, and the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies.

Among other objectives, the ACJ Bill, 2013 intends to regulate the implementation of plea bargain in the prosecution of corruption cases in the country.

The bill is one of the proposed justice sector reforms laws that are pending before the National Assembly.

In an address at the event, the Convener of the Technical Working Group of the Panel on Justice Reform, Prof. Yemi Akinseye-George, SAN, explained that among other features, ACJ Bill 2013 contains regulatory guidelines that would prevent abuses in plea bargain.

A summary document of the proposals for the Reform of Administration of Criminal Justice, which formed the ACJ Bill, 2013, disclosed that “the presiding judge or the magistrate is not permitted to be part of the discussions” leading to a plea bargain agreement.

Also, a prosecutor can only enter into plea bargain agreement after due consultations with investigators and other stakeholders in the criminal case.

“The ACJ Bill provides that the prosecutor can only enter into a plea or sentence agreement after consultation with the investigating police officer, and the victim or his representative, with due regard to the nature and circumstances relating to the offence, the defendant and public interest,” the document said.

The proposed law also stipulated that plea bargain agreements must be in writing, and must be signed.

However, while the ACJ Bill, 2013, exempted magistrates and judges from participating in plea bargain arrangements, the proposed law empowered the judicial officers to still go ahead to impose sentences that are different from the ones agreed upon in plea bargain agreements.

Such sentences could be lesser, or heavier, than the penalty agreed on in the plea bargain agreement.

But the document also explained that “where presiding judge or magistrate is of the view that the offence requires a heavier sentence than the one agreed, he is to inform the defendant of his view.”

Once informed of the court’s decision to pass a heavier sentence, the accused person is entitled to withdraw his guilty plea, or abide by the confession and accept the stiffer punishment.

Should the accused person opt to withdraw the guilty plea upon which the plea bargain agreement was entered, the trial will proceed afresh before another presiding judge or magistrate.

The document noted that “the provision which allows the judge or magistrate to decline to be bound by sentence agreed to by the prosecutor and the defendant is a safeguard for situations where public sensibility may be offended by the sentence entered.”

The move to regulate perceived abuse in the implementation of plea bargain in the provisions of ACJ Bill, 2013, was informed by the controversy generated by previous plea bargain arrangements in the country, particularly in the case of a pension thief, John Yakubu, who was given an option of N750,000 fine after admitting to have connived with others to steal N23bn while serving as a director in the Police Pension Commission.

The Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Justice, Ali Ahmad, in an address an the media briefing, expressed hopes that the Senate will pass the ACJ Bill, 2013, in no distant time.

He noted that the Bill had introduced several innovative measures that would significantly improve the delivery of criminal justice in the country, including central criminal records registry system, restorative justice measures, non-custodial sentences including community sentence orders and probation, mandatory guidelines for carrying out specific tasks by prosecutors and other operators in the system, as well as accountability and mechanisms for monitoring and reducing prison congestion. (0)

Proposed law disqualifies judges from plea bargain deals

Jonathan approves 25 judges to be promoted as Justice of appeal court

President Goodluck Jonathan has approved the elevation of 25 judges selected from High Courts across the country for appointment as justices of the Court of Appeal.

The new justices of the nation’s appellate court, whose elevation was announced about two weeks ago by the National Judicial Council (NJC), are to be sworn-in by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Aloma Mukhtar.(CJN) on March 24, 2014 at 12 noon in the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

The President’s approval of their appointment now brings the number of justices of the Court of Appeal to 90 from 70.

NJC’s Acting Director, Information, Soji Oye said, in a statement Monday, that the elevation of the judges followed NJC’s recommendation, which is in line with the new Court of Appeal (Amendment) Act, which increased the number of justices of the court from 70 to 90.

He said their elevation was also informed by the vacancies “occasioned by the demise, retirement and elevation of some justices of the court to the Supreme Court.”

The affected judges include Justices Bolokuromo M. Ugo (Bayelsa State), Biobele A. Georgewill  (Rivers State), Oludotun A. Adefope-Okojie (Ogun State), Misitura O. Bolaji-Yusuf   (Oyo State), J.O.K.Oyewole (Osun State) and O.E. Williams-Dawudu  (Lagos State)

Others include Justices Hamma Akawu Barka (Gombe State), Joseph Jude Jella (Taraba State), Bitrus G. Sanga (Bauchi State), Muhammed Mustapha (Borno State),Yargata Nimpar (Gombe State), Sa’idu Tanko Hussein (Kogi State), Mudashiru N. Oniyangi (Kwara State) and Amina Audi Wambai  (Niger State).

Also affected are Justices Ridwan Maiwada Abdullahi (Nasarawa State), Tani Y. Hassan (Kano State), Muhammed Lawal Shuaibu  (Jigawa State), Kadi Musa Hassan Alkali (Kaduna State), Jamilu Y. Tukur (Katsina State), Paul Obi Elechi (Ebonyi State), Ugochukwu A. Ogakwu (Enugu State), Nonyerem Okoronkwo (Imo State), Joseph E. Ekanem (Akwa Ibom State), F.E. Oho (Delta State), Abimbola O.O. Adejumo (Edo State). (0)

Jonathan approves 25 judges to be promoted as Justice of appeal court

Indicted judges to go on compulsory retirement - Jonathan

Following their indictment by National Judicial Commission (NJC) of gross misconduct, President Goodluck Jonathan has approved the compulsory retirement of Justices Gladys Olotu of the Federal High Court and. U.A Inyang of FCT High Court.

NJC had recommended to the president, that the two indicted judges be dismissed.

However, Jonathan acceded to the recommendation, and therefore approved compulsory retirement for the duo.

Confirming the approval, Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mohammed Bello Adoke while briefing State House correspondents  Tuesday, said their compulsory retirement took effect on Monday. (0)

Indicted judges to go on compulsory retirement - Jonathan