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