Law Anti-graft war: Is NJC on war path with presidency?

As the next half of the anti-corruption war of President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration begins, the relationship between the presidency and the judiciary appears soured by heated exchanges following the recall of six judges accused of corruption.

The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, had at several fora pledged the cooperation of the judiciary to the Federal Government’s anti-corruption campaign by reforming the judiciary for better service delivery.

However, the latest faceoff has been stirred by the recall of six of the eight judges accused of corruption following the raid on’ residence of some judges by the Department of State Services (DSS). Many believe that the situation may have affected the level of confidence between the two arms of government.

The NJC had at its 82nd meeting on June 1 recalled Justice John Inyang Okoro of the Supreme Court; Justice Uwani Abba Aji of the Court of Appeal; Justices Adeniyi Ademola, Hydiazira Nganjiwa and Musa Kurya of the Federal High Court; and Justice Agbadu James Fishim of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria.

The NJC stated that of the three justices charged to court, Justice Sylvester Ngwuta of the Supreme Court and Justices Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia and Ademola, both of the Federal High Court, only the latter has been acquitted and discharged of allegations of money laundering and unlawful possession of firearms by an FCT High Court.

The recall was criticised by the Special Assistant to the President on Prosecution, Okoi Obono-Obla and the chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC), Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN). Both accused the NJC of not being on board in the anti-graft war following the recall of the judges. They said the recall intended to over reach the appeal challenging the acquittal of Justice Ademola.

“It is wrong for a judge to be under criminal investigation because a judge should be above board. He should not sit until his appeal is heard and determined,” Obla said.

“An appeal is not tantamount to a stay of execution but we are talking of a judge’s integrity; the reputation of the judge, the credibility of the judiciary. This is a judge whose credibility is at stake.

“If I were that judge, I would not sit until the appeal is heard because members of the public will not have confidence in his court and the judicial system relies on the confidence of the people,” he added.

But the NJC, through its Head of Information, Soji Oye, in a statement on June 11 blamed the prosecution for its failure to file notice of appeal within time in the case of recalled Justice Ademola.

“Contrary to the above statement, the Registry of the High Court of the FCT, Abuja, informed the Department of Information of the National Judicial Council that the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation filed two Notices of Appeal in the Court; the first one on 7th April, 2017, against Hon Justice A. F. A. Ademola, his wife, Olabowale Ademola and Joe Agi, SAN. The second one was filed on 6th of June, 2017, two days after the press release was issued by the National Judicial Council, with additional grounds of appeal against only Hon. Justice A.F.A. Ademola,” the statement said.

“It is on record that when the parties were invited by High Court of the FCT for settlement of records to be transmitted to the Court of Appeal on 18th April, 2017, the appellant failed to turn up. The registrar of the court further adjourned the settlement of records to 21st April, 2017, and invited all the parties, but the appellant again did not come to court.

“The total number of 45 days allowed for compilation of record in all circumstances expired on 7th May, 2017, for the Registrar of the Lower Court and 22nd May, 2017, for the appellant.

“Council noted that the Office of the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice only filed additional grounds of appeal in the court on Tuesday 6th June, 2017, three days after the press release by the council that the judicial officers have been directed to resume their judicial duties.

“It was on 6th June, 2017, that letters were again issued by the registrar to the parties for settlement of records against 14th June, 2017.

“For avoidance of doubt, by the Rules of the Court of Appeal, there cannot be a proper appeal before the court until parties have agreed and settled records before the lower court and transmit copies of such records to the Court of Appeal before an appeal number is given. It is only after an appeal number is given that an appeal is said to be entered in the Court of Appeal,” it added.

While the controversy over the recall of the judges was still on, an online publication claimed that the DSS has found the sum of $9 million in the home of the CJN in Abuja. The CJN through his media aide, Awassam Bassey, quickly rebutted the claim describing the sponsors as people intent to “distract, discourage or slow down the reforms he has begun implementing.”

Following the above assertions, Obla in a statement on June 12 challenged NJC to furnish proof of service of notices of reconciliation of April 18 and 21 which the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation shunned.

He debunked the submission by the NJC that time for compilation of record at the lower court for notice of appeal is 45 days, insisting that it is 60 days.

“On the contrary, the FCT High Court registry by a notice dated 6 June, 2017 signed by one Paul A. Edili, Esquire (Head of Appeal) invited both parties to the appeal to attend court on the 14 June, 2017 for the purpose reconciliation of records of appeal,” he said.

He added further that, “the NJC cannot feign ignorance of the rules of the court it supervises. The assertion that it is a total of 45 days that is allowed for compilation of Record of Appeal in all circumstances is, with respect, utterly false.

“We are therefore afraid (in the light of the foregoing), that the decision of the NJC to recall Hon. Justice Ademola against whom there is a valid and subsisting Notices of Appeal at this moment is, to say the least, premature, ill-timed and ill-fated.”

Some lawyers are of the view that the NJC was right in recalling the judges after eight months of suspension without a formal charge, while Justice Ademola’s acquittal is still subsisting pending a contrary order.

In his reaction, anti-corruption lawyer, Yusuf Ali (SAN), stated that the constitution provides that any person arrested on suspicion of crime must be taken to court within 24 hours, adding that the failure to prosecute the judges after eight months of arrest where they were also suspended was a violation of their fundamental right.

Also speaking, Kefas Gadzama criticized the arrest of the judges without proper evidence, describing it as “all about bickering” among the three arms of government.

Also speaking, Wahab Olatoye flayed the treatment meted to Justice Ademola by the security agencies on October 8, 2016, describing it as a major cause of “perversion of justice.”

“It is not the judge who suffers but Nigerians. Do you know how many cases, some involving criminal allegations that are pending and the people are in prisons?” he asked.

But Barr Hamid Ajibola Jimoh disagreed with lawyers  criticising the arrest of the judges in the first instance, saying it is because the matter is a criminal procedure, and the law creating the security agencies such as the DSS and the Police has not made them answerable to the NJC, therefore they need not consult the agency before carrying out their duties. He explained that the functions of the NJC are administrative powers to discipline and not criminal investigation.

“I don’t think the NJC has the powers to stop the law enforcement agencies from performing their functions. 

“The law enforcement agencies can still arraign the judges. No law said the executive must consult with the judiciary before conducting a criminal trial. If any of them has not been cleared properly, there is no need to recall them.  Judges that have issues should leave the system for other judges,” he said.

The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), through its General Secretary, Isiaka Olagunju, said the stand of the association as approved at the National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting in Lokoja is that being on suspension for long without a formal charge violated the fundamental rights of the judges.

“However, this does not mean that the judges can still not be arraigned whenever prosecution is ready instead of keeping them in suspense,” he said.