The Nigerian
Bar Association has reacted to the charges filed by President Muhammadu
Buhari’s government against the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Walter Onnoghen.
The Federal
Government will on Monday, January 14, 2019, arraign the CJN before the Justice
Danladi Yakubu-led Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) in Abuja on charges of
failures to declare his assets as required by law and for operating Bank
Domiciliary Foreign Currency Accounts.
The charges
against Justice Onnoghen were filed and served on him on Friday at his official
residence in Abuja preparatory to his appearance at the tribunal.
Reacting,
NBA in a statement signed by its General Secretary Jonathan Gudu Taidi
described the move against Onnoghen as an assault, intimidation and desecration
of the judiciary, which must stop.
The body
questioned government’s position to embark on this “anomalous course of
charging the CJN before the CCT without first presenting whatever facts it
purportedly has against His Lordship to the NJC”
The
statement read in part: “Assault, Intimidation and Desecration of the Judiciary
Must Stop
1. Nigerians
have witnessed again the targeted assault of the judiciary by agents of the
Federal Government of Nigeria (“FGN”) epitomized by today’s media trial of the
Chief Justice of Nigeria, Honorable Mr Justice Walter S N Onnoghen, GCON
(“CJN”). According to media reports which have now been validated by the
Statement of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (“CCT”) that was released today an
application was “filed by the Code of Conduct Bureau to the CCT Chairman
yesterday for the trial to commence against the Chief Justice of Nigeria on six
count charges” and that the CCT “will commence the trial on Monday, 14th
January 2019”. The Nigerian Bar Association unequivocally condemns this
assault, intimidation and desecration of the Judiciary by FGN agencies and
demands that it be stopped immediately.
2. In
Nganjiwa v Federal Republic of Nigeria (2017) LPELR-43391(CA), the Court of
Appeal made it very clear that any misconduct attached to the office and
functions of a judicial officer must first be reported to and handled by the
National Judicial Council (“NJC”) pursuant to the provisions of our laws. Only
after the NJC has pronounced against such judicial officer can the prosecuting
agencies of the Federal Government proceed against him. As the Court pointed
out, these requirements of the law are anchored on the overriding principles of
separation of powers between the executive, the judiciary and the legislature
and on the need to preserve, promote and protect the independence of the
judiciary. Our respective liberties and the rule of law are best protected and
preserved if the judiciary remains independent and shielded from intimidation
and assault by the other arms of the government.
3. In
Nganjiwa v FRN (supra), the Court of Appeal made reference to Rule 3 of the
Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of February 2016 (“Code of
Conduct for Judicial Officers”)and held that the said Rule 3 “makes provision
in relation to fidelity to the Constitution and the Law”. The provisions in
regard to assets declaration as they apply to all public officers including the
CJN are contained in both the Constitution and the Code of Conduct Bureau and
Tribunal Act 1991, the enabling law that establishes both the Code of Conduct
Bureau (“CCB”) and the CCT. The fidelity which judicial officers therefore owe
“to the Constitution and the Law” pursuant to Rule 3 of the Code of Conduct for
Judicial Officers encompasses compliance with the provisions relating to assets
declarations as contained in the Constitution and the Code of Conduct Bureau
and Tribunal Act. Any infraction in that regard by a judicial officer, as the
Court of Appeal rightly held, constitutes a misconduct by the judicial officer
and becomes the subject matter for discipline by the NJC as a condition
precedent to any possible prosecution of the judicial officer by any of the
FGN’s prosecuting agencies.
4. Why has
FGN decided to embark on this anomalous course of charging the CJN before the
CCT without first presenting whatever facts it purportedly has against His
Lordship to the NJC for its deliberation and determination? The Petition that
triggered the CCB action was on its face received by the Bureau on 09 January
2019 and the Charge was promptly drafted and is dated the following day, 10
January 2019 – giving the CCB a record 24 hours for completion of its
investigation and the drafting of the said Charge and ancillary processes! If
one contemplates the fact that the CCT arraignment is scheduled to take place
on 14 January 2019, we have in total a record number of 3 (three) working days
between the receipt and processing of the petition, investigation, preparation
of Charge and ancillary processes and the arraignment! Such unprecedented speed
and efficiency in Nigeria’s criminal justice administration! It is clear, given
the rush with which this matter was conducted by the CCB, that the NJC was not
privy to it and did not conduct its mandatorily required disciplinary processes
prior to the filing of the Charge before the CCT.
5. We still
wonder why the FGN choose to deviate from the laid down and explicit provisions
of the law as expounded in Nganjiwa v FRN (supra). Could it be that it was
misadvised? Or is this a naked show of power and force by agencies of the FGN?
And why embark on the media trial of the CJN? This, unfortunately, is a
predilection of the FGN’s prosecuting agencies with the possible exception of
the Federal Ministry of Justice. As the NBA pointed out in its International
Anti-Corruption Day Statement that was issued on 09 December 2018 “media trial
of persons charged with corrupt practices . . . amount to corruption itself.
Indeed, those orchestrated media trials degrade and corrupt the justice
administration system quite apart from the incalculable (but obviously
intended) damage that it does to persons who may ultimately be discharged and
acquitted. In point of fact, it is corrupt practice to use as license or hide
under the cover of the fight against corruption to recklessly destroy the
names, characters and reputations of persons who have not been found guilty of
corrupt practices by competent courts and who may ultimately be pronounced
innocent of such charges.” These media trials must, alongside the on-going
desecration and assault of the judiciary, cease forthwith.”
Comments