NANFeatures/Vol.10/No.228/2016 (Sept. 28)
Conflicting judgments, corruption and matters arising
By Martins Odeh, News Agency of Nigeria (NAN)
Concerned citizens note that recent development involving conflicting judgments in the country’s justice system is worrisome.
They observe that there are several miscarriages of justice when the sector should be seen as the last hope of the common.
According to them, the public has continued to grapple with the development since the country’s return to civil governance.
Analysts, in separate interviews, note that conflicting court decisions have continued to suggest impressions that are inimical to the administration of justice.
They urge the heads of courts to remain incorruptible as the only virtue that will spur the sector to perform its duties.
With the benefit of hindsight, President Muhammadu Buhari had earlier, at the 2015 All Nigeria Judges’ Conference in Abuja, accused corrupt lawyers and judges of sabotaging his efforts to recover stolen assets.
Represented by Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo, he noted that was both local and international dissatisfaction with the long delays in the trial process.
“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,’’ the president said.
Buhari also solicited a total reform of the justice sector to stop instances of delays, conflicting judgments, or outright inaction in some high-profile corruption cases over shoddy investigations.
Sharing similar sentiments, Chief Okoi Obono-Obla, Special-Assistant to the President on Prosecution, said the inconsistency in the application of procedural rules by judges was the bane of transparency in the sector.
He said the judges and senior lawyers had always engaged in the interpretation of the rules to suit their whims and caprices.
“The resultant effect of such misdemeanour is only retrogressive. One wonders where the pressure on the judges is being mounted from.
“If the president himself is crying over their attitudes then it is surely not from him.
“Why would courts of coordinate jurisdiction entertain suit with similar reliefs to the extent of giving pronouncements after this discrepancy has become a public discourse,’’ he said.
Concerned by the development, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmoud, stressed the need for heads of Courts to be incorruptible.
He said the Nigerian Judicial Council (NJC) would continue to rid the sector of “bad eggs.
“The council has not failed to discipline erring judges and legal practitioners.
“We have called for defensible petitions from the public on matters relating to allegations of nauseating conducts of judges while handling cases before them.’’
Observers note that Justices Okon Abang and Ibrahim Watila, of the Federal High Courts in Abuja and Port-Harcourt respectively recently, made the latest conflicting decisions that further brought stalemate in the lingering Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) leadership crisis.
They also note that while Watila granted PDP the leave to conduct its National Convention, Abang later went on to bar the conduct of the convention in Port Harcourt.
Few days later, the FCT High Court in Kubwa gave a decision suggesting that Alhaji Ali Modu-Sheriff was illegal occupant of the office of the PDP as Acting National Chairman.
Mr Onjefu Ogbe, a legal practitioner in Abuja, said that the judges’ actions might have been influenced by the different issues, adding that no judge was bound by the decision of another.
“The court may the same but the judges have the powers to adjudicate on cases based on their understanding and rules of the court.
“It is left to parties to approach the appellate courts for further interpretation of those decisions.
“It would be unfair for anyone to suspect foul play when a matter turned out in a particular way,’’ he said.
In the same vein, Mr James Okala, another legal practitioner, opined that those two courts ought not to have entertained one case with similar pleadings.
“Order 49 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2009 pursuant to the provision of Section 254 of the Constitution, 1999, provides in sub-rules 1, 2 and 3 as follows:
“ A cause or matter may, before evidence is taken, and at the request of either party to the suit, be transferred by a judge before whom the cause or matter is pending to another court of the same division.
“A cause or matter may at any stage of the proceedings be reassigned to another judge of the same division or of any other division by the chief judge whether or not the cause or matter is being heard before him,’’ he said.
According to him, the interpretation of the above provisions compels the head of the court to assign that case file to one judge to handle.
He observed that from the above provisions, it can, thus, be seen that there were judicial and administrative powers to effect intra-division or inter-division transfer of the Port Harcourt action and reassignment of same.
On his part, Chief Akpan Udofia, a human rights lawyer, said that officers of courts must be upright at all times, adding that the two judges had played themselves into the public court.
“Political matters have often exposed the judiciary to ridicule because the contending parties have always exacted so much pressure on the judges.
“Some times, the speed at which the parties wanted these matters to be addressed could push the heads of courts to make mistakes.
“It is, therefore, the responsibility of the NJC to stem the overzealousness of some of judges,’’ he said.
According to him, as the executive arm of government strives to rid the country of corrupt practices, the judiciary must as well strive to to prevent questionable judgments.(NANFeatures)
**If used, please credit the writer as well as News Agency of Nigeria (NAN)