
	Chief Justice of Nigeria, Mariam Aloma Mukthar
	With the recent retirement of two judges, the judiciary seems 
set for a new regime of zero tolerance for graft, writes Nkiruka Okoh
	Of the three tiers of government in Nigeria, the limelight is rarely 
beamed on the judiciary if compared to the Executive and the 
Legislature. However, recent developments may have shifted the attention
 of Nigerians to the happenings in the judiciary.
	The suspension and subsequent retirement of Justice Archibong was the 
fall-out of the investigations by the Council vide Section 292(1)(b) of 
the 1999 Constitution (as amended), having found his conduct 
reprehensible when he heard the case of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 
Vs Dr. Erastus Akingbola.
	However, the suspension and recommendation of Justice Naron for 
compulsory retirement was sequel to findings by the Council that there 
were constant and regular voice calls and exchange of MMS and text 
messages between the judge and the lead counsel for one of the parties 
to the suit in  Osun State Governorship Election Tribunal, contrary to 
the code of conduct for judicial officers vide Section 292 (1)(b) of the
 constitution.
	This action has not only exposed the erring judges however, it has 
further thrown light on attempts by the CJN to restore the integrity of 
the judiciary.
	No doubt, the judiciary in every democratic society plays a critical 
role towards the realization and sustenance of justice hence it is 
referred to as the last hope of the common man.
	But over the years, the Nigeria judiciary has been criticised as being 
subject to politicisation, inertia and corruption, thus questioning its 
role in Nigeria’s fragile democracy.
	Sadly, the ‘wrist slap judgments’ in certain cases as well as 
increasing impunity that had slowly eroded the common man’s confidence 
and cast doubts on the credibility of the judiciary. Although, there had
 been attempts at cleaning up the Judiciary through sanctions, the 
outcome of such attempts have been underwhelming.
	It is, perhaps, for that reason that Mukthar admitted before the senate
 in July last year that “there is corruption in the Judiciary just like 
every aspect of the society. The most important thing is to curb it and 
lead by example and ensure others follow.”
	But to many Nigerians, this was just propaganda. But an undeterred CJN,
 during the 2012 Biennial conference of All Nigeria Judges, reiterated 
same warned against corruption on the bench and promised to act 
accordingly.
	“I urge that you reform yourselves and allow yourselves to be reformed 
by amending your conduct that brings dishonour to the judiciary as an 
institution.”
	Finally, it may have dawned on many that the country’s first female law
 officer is serious about taking the bull by its horns.
Thus, apart from the recent sanction of Archibong and Naron, the NJC has also set up a fact finding committee to investigate allegations against Justice Abubakar Talba of the Federal High Court in the Police Pension case of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Vs Mr. John Yusuf & Others.
Thus, apart from the recent sanction of Archibong and Naron, the NJC has also set up a fact finding committee to investigate allegations against Justice Abubakar Talba of the Federal High Court in the Police Pension case of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Vs Mr. John Yusuf & Others.
	Following this, the cleansing revolution of the Judiciary is fast 
becoming a reality. As if taking a cue from the NJC, the Legal 
Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC) recently suspended a senior 
Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Chief Ajibola Aribisala, for alleged gross 
misconduct by using the coveted rank.
	Aribisala became the second SAN to be deprived of the use of the rank, 
coming after the former Justice Minister, Mr. Michael Aonodoaka. The 
statement from the LPPC read: “The LPPC at its meeting held today 
February 26, 2013, considered the petition by the Fidelity Bank against 
the person of Chief Ajibola  A. Aribisala (SAN) together to his response
 to same and after due consideration of the said response has decided in
 its wisdom to suspend him from the use of the rank of Senior Advocate 
of Nigeria and all other privileges attached to that rank pending the 
outcome of the court case and impeding investigation by the subcommittee
 set up by the LPPC.”
	But while many considered the latest development within the judiciary 
as a encouraging and enjoined other arms of government to take a cue 
from the sanitization process, the need to sustain the tempo has also 
become an issue of concern.
	Therefore, observers advised that the effort should be a continuous 
process based on facts of investigation and not become a tool for 
intimidation of certain members of the bench. This, in effect, observers
 fear could affect the sanitization process, if not properly handled and
 stifle the independence of the judiciary, especially for judges who are
 not morally or professionally corrupt but are known for taking the 
highway in dispensing free and unfettered justice.
	But again, some have dismissed the effect of a negative fall-out, 
noting that it would only ensure that all legal practitioners, not only 
members of the bench, would put their best foot forward at all times.
	Those who belong to this school express concern against the backdrop 
that the issue of corruption in the judiciary should be tackled from its
 root, noting that the appointment of judicial officers has is today 
enmeshed in politics.
	This is contrary to argument that countries that are serious about 
sustaining democracy culture do not play politics with judicial 
appointments. But eligibility and competence are considered uppermost in
 such appointments.
	But this is believed to have also assisted in casting shadows on the 
credibility of the judiciary and contributed to the general belief that 
the judiciary has been laidback its role as a custodian of the rule of 
law and due process. However, when the politics that often dots such 
appointment is yanked off, it is believed that some semblance of hope 
would be further restored.
	Generally, observers hold the view that, although the CJN has vowed to 
sanitise the judicial system as well as speed up the justice delivery 
process in the country, there is the fear that the role the Executive in
 the removal of erring judges might only slow down the tide as the 
principle of checks and balances eventually leaves the Executive with 
the discretion to either go along with the recommendation of the council
 or ‘forgive’ the erring judge.
	Unfortunately, this position questions the independence of the 
judiciary and the role the NJC in its sanitization bid. While the CJN 
has kick-started the drive for the clean-up, it is imperative that 
members, associations as well as stakeholders in that arm of government 
continue to guide against blackmail, corruption and professional 
misconduct.
	In the final analysis, the judiciary, many contend, should be applauded
 for the current drive especially the CJN’s zero tolerance for 
unprofessional conducts.
	Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. 
Mohammed Adoke, (SAN) has confirmed the president’s support for the 
ongoing sanitization in the judiciary. “It is Mr. President’s belief 
that once we are able to cleanse the judiciary of corruption, then our 
fight against corruption in its entirety will take a firm root and will 
be on its way to success.”
	Other well meaning Nigerians have equally followed suit, noting that 
amidst the support for the judiciary, it is expected that the Executive 
and Legislature take a cue from this and exhibit seriousness in their 
fight against corruption.
No comments:
Post a Comment