15092022

BY ISE-OLUWA IGE
In this report, Vangfuard
Law and Human Rights
examines relevant
provisions in the 1999
Constitution on the powers
of appointment and
discipline of judges of
superior courts of records
in the country; dissects the
ratio decidendi in the
February 25, 2022
judgment of the Appeal
Court which voided the
2014 compulsory
retirement of Justice
Gladys Olotu from the high
court bench; scavenges the
likely implications of the
Appeal Court verdict on all
the disciplinary actions so
far taken by the executive
arm of government against
errant judges in Nigeria on
the sole recommendations
of the NJC without any
recourse to FJSC and
argues that the awaited
pronouncement of the
S’Court on the powers of
NJC regarding judges’
discipline is one that must
not be delayed further for
the purpose of stability of
the third arm of
government.
EDITORIAL TEAM
Ise-Oluwa Ige, PhD
Innocent Anaba
Ikechukwu EDITORIAL Nnochiri Innocent
Henry Ojelu Anaba
( Editor)
Send your mails and
enquiries Ikechukwu to: Nnochiri
lawandhumanrights
Henry Ojelu
@vanguardngr.com
Onozure Dania
08179614306/08152060944
Apprehension as S’Court sets to
review powers of NJC to discipline judges
*Supreme Court of Nigeria.
EXCEPT the Supreme Court of
Nigeria rules otherwise, the
powers of discipline solely exercised
by the National Judicial
Council, NJC, in the last 22 years,
over serving judicial officers in superior
courts of records nationwide,
may be whittled down.
It will be recalled that a threemember
panel of the Abuja Division
of the Court of Appeal, had on
February 25, 2022, declared that
the National Judicial Council,
NJC, under the law, does not have
the sole powers to discipline erring
judges in the country without
recourse to the Federal Judicial
Service Commission, FJSC.
Specifically, the intermediate appellate
court had ruled that the
FJSC, given the provisions of the
constitution, must be aware of any
infraction committed by any erring
judge and make recommendations
regarding the affected judicial
officer to the NJC before the
Council itself can proceed with investigation
of such judicial officer
and possible recommendation for
sanction to the applicable head of
the executive arm of government
for endorsement.
The decision which appears a
time-bomb, has fundamentally altered
the status quo.
This is so because the NJC had
solely exercised the powers of discipline
over judges since 1999 when
it was established by section 153
of the 1999 Constitution without
any recourse to the FJSC.
In the event the apex court sustains
the reasoning of the Court of
Appeal, it is not unlikely that there
could be a floodgate of lawsuits by
many judicial officers who were
previously sanctioned by sitting
Presidents or state governors upon
recommendations by the NJC between
1999 when the present Constitution
was decreed into law by
the Federal Military Government,
and 2022 when the case law in question
came into being.
Fully aware of the dangerous implications
of the decision, the National
Judicial Council did not file
its appeal to the judgment immediately
until after it had consulted
widely on what its position on the
matter would be.
In fact, before the NJC could act,
time allowed by law to appeal was
already spent.
According to NJC’s Chief Legal
Officer, Uju Lisa Ekwulu, the Council
after meetings, decided to hire
a consortium of lawyers led by
Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) to
handle the sensitive issue at the
apex bench.
In an affidavit deposed to by Ekwulu
to secure the leave of the court
to appeal the decision out of time,
she disclosed that the NJC on April
25, 2022 briefed new counsel,
made up of a consortium of lawyers
headed by Prince Lateef O.
Fagbemi, SAN to lead other distinguished
senior members of the
bar, namely: Paul Usoro, SAN; Dr.
Garba Tetengi, SAN; Muiz Banire,
SAN and Yakubu Maikasuwa,
Esq., to file an appeal to the Supreme
Court challenging the
Court of Appeal’s decision.
Ekwulu’s exact words in the affidavit:
“I know as a fact that the
delay in briefing the consortium
of new lawyers to represent the Appellant/Applicant
was due to the
administrative bottlenecks and
red-tapes involved in the process
of briefing an external counsel/solicitor
in the Appellant’s Council.
“Although at the time of briefing
Prince Lateef O. Fagbemi, SAN,
and the consortium of lawyers so
briefed, the time prescribed by the
rules of the Honourable Court for
bringing an appeal had not lapsed
but was significantly spent.”
The deponent averred that she
was informed by NJC’s lead counsel,
Prince Fagbemi (SAN) that
“the consortium of lawyers met
three times inclusive of 19th May,
2022 to agree on what and how to
proceed with this matter.
“Unfortunately, his earlier
commitment(s) as a member of the
Legal Practitioners’ Privileges
Committee, LPPC, which has been
meeting repeatedly in May, 2022
made him unable to get to the work
on time and conclude same, until
the time for the filing of this Application
had lapsed;
“That he knows as a fact that the
Appellant/Applicant is out of time
within which to file its Notice of
Appeal and there is the need to
seek the leave of the Honourable
Court to file the Notice of Appeal
out of time.”
The application before the court
is meant to regularise the process
filed by the NJC before the Supreme
Court to set aside the Court
of Appeal decision on the extent of
powers exercisable by the NJC in
judges’ discipline.
Genesis of
constitutional suit
before S’Court
While the matter
was still in
court, the baton
of leadership at
the National
level had
changed hands
from Dr Goodluck
Ebele
Jonathan to
President Muhammadu
Buhari
who was
touted as a nononsense
Army
General with
zero-tolerance
for corruption
and injustice
Vanguard Law and Human Rights
reports that Justice Olotu was appointed
a Federal High Court Judge
by former President Olusegun
Obasanjo on July 28, 2000, and inaugurated
by the then Chief Justice
of Nigeria, Justice Mohammed Lawal
Uwais on September 1, 2000.
Olotu had a glorious time in the
judiciary right from her days in the
Edo State judiciary where she started
as a Magistrate in 1991 and
climbed the judiciary ladder until
she was found appointable as a
judge of the Federal High Court of
Vanguard, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2022 — 13
Nigeria in 2000. She benefitted
from the first few appointments
President Olusegun Obasanjo
made into the Federal High
Court bench after he came into
power in May 1999.
But sometime in 2013/2014
when the leadership of the NJC
was under the first female Chief
Justice of Nigeria, CJN, Justice
Mariam Aloma Muhktar, not
less than six petitions were written
against Justice Gladys Olotu
Ṡome were alleging corruption
while there was one alleging infraction
of the constitutional provision
on the maximum time allowed
by law to deliver judgment
in a case handled by a judge to
guard against justice delay.
The judge was served copies of
the petitions while she was invited
to appear before a Fact-Finding
Committee set up to investigate
all the allegations in the petitions.
After the first committee sat,
another probe panel was set up
by Justice Aloma-led NJC to look
into the petitions’ grey areas in
the report of the first panel.
The second Committee eventually
found Justice Olotu guilty on
a lone count of delivering judgment
in a case out of time allowed
by law.
Afterwards, the NJC subsequently
recommended Justice
Gladys Olotu to Dr Jonathan
Goodluck who was the President
at the time, for compulsory retirement.
The Acting Director of Information
of the NJC, Soji Oye, had,
in a statement, explained in 2014
thus: “The National Judicial
Council, under the Chairmanship
of the Chief Justice of Nigeria,
Justice Aloma Mukhtar, at
its meeting which was held on
February 26, 2014, recommended
the compulsory retirement
from office of Justice G . K. Olotu
of the Federal High Court and
Justice U. A. Inyang of High
Court of Justice of the Federal
Capital Territory, Abuja, respectively
for gross misconduct.”
The statement said the recommendation
for compulsory retirement
of the two judges was based
on findings made by the NJC after
investigations into allegations
contained in petitions
brought against them.
According to the statement, the
NJC had found that Justice Olotu
“failed to deliver judgment in
Suit No. FHC/UY/250/2003, 18
months after the final address by
all the counsel in the suit, contrary
to the constitutional provisions
that judgments should be delivered
within a period of 90 days.”
By the decision of the NJC, the
career path of Justice Olotu was
truncated as she was sacked from
office on February 26, 2014 at the
age of 54 years.
Although Justice Olotu was directed
to proceed on suspension
pending the approval of its recommendation
by the Head of the
federal executive arm of government,
former President Goodluck
Jonathan did not waste time to
give his approval.
The then Attorney-General of
the Federation and Minister of
Justice, Mohammed Bello Adoke,
SAN, had announced that Olotu’s
compulsory retirement took effect
from Monday, March 3, 2014.
Justice Olotu
kicks, sues NJC,
FG
Three days after Justice Olotu
was effectively removed from the
bench, she approached a Federal
High Court sitting in Abuja with
an application of certiorari to
quash the recommendation of the
NJC and invalidate the approval
granted by the President on her
sack.
That was March 6, 2014.
Joined in the suit as co-respondents
were the former President
Jonathan, the NJC, the Chief Justice
of Nigeria, the Chief Judge of
the Federal High Court, and the
Attorney-General of the Federation.
But the Federal Government in
its written submission had asked
the court to strike out the suit.
In the preliminary objection
filed by its counsel, Taiwo Abidogun,
from the office of the Attorney-General
of the Federation, the
government said the court lacked
the jurisdiction to entertain the
suit on the account that sections
251 and 254 of the 1999 Constitution
exclusively conferred jurisdiction
on matters pertaining to
the employment and retirement
of Justice Olotu on the National
Industrial Court, NIC.
The matter eventually moved to
the NIC where Justice Olotu’s
team of lawyers led by Dr Alfred
Eghobamien, SAN; Ladi Rotimi-
Williams, SAN and Sunday Ameh,
SAN, argued that section 36 of the
1999 Constitution was breached
by the NJC and its Investigative
Panel in arriving at their recommendation
for her compulsory
retirement.
Justice Olotu further contended
that the petition against her,
upon which NJC acted, bordered
on her failure to deliver a judgment
within 90 days and not on
misconduct that could carry heavy
punishment such as compulsory
retirement.
She complained that the recommendation
by the NJC to the President
for her compulsory retirement
as a High Court Judge was
done in bad faith and in breach of
extant codes and rules applicable
to her appointment.
She said she got to know about
her sack on February 27, 2014,
through a press statement the
NJC released to the media.
While the matter was still in
court, the baton of leadership at
Continues on Page 14
C
M
Y
K