We blame the Executive, Legislative and even the security operatives. But the real corrupt institution is the JUDITIARY and their cult of SANs.
Is there anyone that goes to any of our courts and comes out clean without any Kola changing hands?

When the supposed most learned in the land starts speaking like a road-side mechanic, you don't need a seer to tell you we're in trouble. Elementary law should have told her that in a common-law legal system like ours, there is rebuttable presumption of innocence. We'd perpetrate more injustice if we allow sentiments to becloud our sense of reasoning. The worst of criminals deserve the best legal representation. Little wonder females were not allowed in the legal profession for a very legal time- hard as they try, emotional sentiment superimpose itself on their sense of reasoning- most times!

DanNafada:

Excellent post.

The fact that the CJN herself does not appreciate the importance of this basic principle of Law gives you an idea of the quality of the Judiciary in Nigeria.

that's why i say women are emotional beings. she probably said this on the spur of the moment. little wonder they cant be trusted with sensitive positions

ogmask:

You can imagin the way our judiciary is run. With this kind of mindset we can not go anywhere.
The CJN has brought another dimension to the judiciary.
Madam Alunma, no wonder you have not been able to bring any positive to the judiciary. With this statement i can imagin where she expends her energy.
The best a defence lawyer can do is put up a spirited defence on behalf of his client. The bulk stops at the preciding judge or tribunal. Lawyers must do their job which is to prosecute and defend. The bench on the other hand, which is Alunma constituency, should stop corrupt practices.

I think what she means is this. Since the job of a lawyer and that of a judge go hand in hand, for a SAN to defend a corrupt judge, such SAN must have had (and will want to have) judgments delivered in his favour whether or not it's glaring that said judgments should go the other way. We a dealing with a corrupt judge here! There must be proofs of said corruption. In a situation where a corrupt judge has 6 SAN coming to defend him, there's no doubt that such SANs have profited or hope to profit (not financially though) from such judge's corruption.

bamto: When the supposed most learned in the land starts speaking like a road-side mechanic, you don't need a seer to tell you we're in trouble. Elementary law should have told her that in a common-law legal system like ours, there is rebuttable presumption of innocence. We'd perpetrate more injustice if we allow sentiments to becloud our sense of reasoning. The worst of criminals deserve the best legal representation. Little wonder females were not allowed in the legal profession for a very legal time- hard as they try, emotional sentiment superimpose itself on their sense of reasoning- most times!

Go over the article again. No where was it written that SANs who represents corrupt judges are going to be prosecuted. All she said was when such high profile SAN's are quick to come and defend these judges, then they are probably working in "tandem". Which is the honest truth! Her major complain was that the lawyers are so quick to point the judiciary as corrupt, but they don't point out the bad eggs even though they know them, but defend them.

For the article, what I got was that she wanted to say that corrupt judged work hand in hand with corrupt lawyers. She wasn't in any way trying to go against the constitution by implying that such judge shouldn't get a defence. Read again.

And you're really dumb for making such spiteful statements against female legal practitioners. You think a road side mechanic. Pompous arrogant prick!

Amya:

Go over the article again. No where was it written that SANs who represents corrupt judges are going to be prosecuted. All she said was when such high profile SAN's are quick to come and defend these judges, then they are probably working in "tandem". Which is the honest truth! Her major complain was that the lawyers are so quick to point the judiciary as corrupt, but they don't point out the bad eggs even though they know them, but defend them.

For the article, what I got was that she wanted to say that corrupt judged work hand in hand with corrupt lawyers. She wasn't in any way trying to go against the constitution by implying that such judge shouldn't get a defence. Read again.

And you're really dumb for making such spiteful statements against female legal practitioners. You think a road side mechanic. Pompous arrogant prick!

So what you're saying is that she was making a potentially libelous statement by trying to tar all lawyers who defend allegedly corrupt judges with a black brush.

I fail to see how you have a point here. How is she able to determine if a judge is corrupt until after the full judicial process has taken place? How does she know the lawyer has been able to do same?

Please learn not to support idiocy and inanity. Thanks

[quote
The CJN is a woman not a man.

texazzpete:

So what you're saying is that she was making a potentially libelous statement by trying to tar all lawyers who defend allegedly corrupt judges with a black brush.

I fail to see how you have a point here. How is she able to determine if a judge is corrupt until after the full judicial process has taken place? How does she know the lawyer has been able to do same?

Please learn not to support idiocy and inanity. Thanks

One of the reasons why the judiciary is an independent arm is that the judiciary is egg-shell fragile. When the judiciary fails, the whole system fails. While the worst defaulters of (the rich, the poor,the armed robber, the embezzler, politicians and the masses e.t.c)go through the whole court process, the judges have to go through a special tribunal. Why then don't they go through normal court processes? Shouldn't that be there rights as citizens of the country?

Predilection, predilection predilection! That's why!
For any judge to be called before the NJC for corruption charges there must have been insurmountable evidence of such wrong doing clearly evident and visible and not hearsays! The relationship between a lawyer and a judge makes it so uncomfortable for the former to defend the later during trial as the outcome of the trial (when positive) may create a position of indebtedness on the part of the judge.

What happened to You have a right to an attorney ? Unfortunately someone has to still represent them

EXAMPLE OF A VERY INCOMPETENT JUDGE= Justice Rita Ofili Ajumogobia of Federal High Court Lagos Division

that's the truth

Did this woman just come back from a same society to practice law in Nigeria? She is going to be removed or killed soon. The federal attorney general won't be happy with her.

texazzpete: What a STUPID CJN we have here!

You are presumed innocent until proven guilty. That is what our entire legal system rests on, and that is why even high profile suspects get good lawyers to do all they can to ensure their clients are not proven guilty.

I have no idea if this lady is genuinely daft, heading towards senility or just playing to the gallery, but it was an incredibly stupid thing to say.

I think its very disrespectful of you to so debase the Person of the CJN in this Manner,I just hope you are not a Member of the learned Profession;I would be very disappointed otherwise.
When she said the Counsel were "equally guilty",you should have deduced that she was referring to moral and not legal culpability,which should be obvious if one takes even a cursory Appraisal;where,if not Corruption would a Judge here in Nigeria(or anywhere) get the Money to finance a Defense comprising 6 SANs(not considering their Associates. )?
In future,please endeavor to apply a little Reasoning before commenting on Issues like this,or better still;go find your kind of Thread in the Celebrity Section.

I don't know why personal opinion is prevailing in the course of justice.
You can see the myopic, sentimental and jungle-judgmental mindset of supposed custodian of justice of Nigeria
This shows that if she feels someone is corrupt, then, she will shut her mind against every reasonable evidence to prove that such person is not.
This is sad and bad for our justice system where everyone should be entitled to fair hearing and treatment

fm7070: I don't know why personal opinion is prevailing in the course of justice.
You can see the myopic, sentimental and jungle-judgmental mindset of supposed custodian of justice of Nigeria
This shows that if she feels someone is corrupt, then, she will shut her mind against every reasonable evidence to prove that such person is not.
This is sad and bad for our justice system where everyone should be entitled to fair hearing and treatment

That is not true,for her to have risen this far in the Legal Profession,I'm sure she must be capable of divorcing her personal Sentiments from her Duty to administer Justice impartially. As for her voicing out like this,there is no legal or moral Impediment to her doing so,after-all,like she said;the NBA(and the rest of Nigeria) are always quick to cite Corruption in the Judiciary;all she's doing is making Lawyers and laymen alike recognize that said Corruption is facilitated by several Factors, including the willingness of amoral Lawyers to collude with the corrupt Judges in evading Justice; if you take the time to go through a Report of any of this Sort of Case,you'll see what I mean;frivolous Motions, designed to draw out the Case and frustrate the Prosecutors.

they buy most of them over with huge ego ( money )

get this woman right,what does a judge on trial needs 6 SANS for?.of course to intimidate the njc and tactically compelled them to drop the charges against the accused judge who obviously has been playing out their scripts anytime they appear bfore him.the cjn is very right and vry on point.

Goof of life.

Amya:

Go over the article again. No where was it written that SANs who represents corrupt judges are going to be prosecuted. All she said was when such high profile SAN's are quick to come and defend these judges, then they are probably working in "tandem". Which is the honest truth! Her major complain was that the lawyers are so quick to point the judiciary as corrupt, but they don't point out the bad eggs even though they know them, but defend them.

For the article, what I got was that she wanted to say that corrupt judged work hand in hand with corrupt lawyers. She wasn't in any way trying to go against the constitution by implying that such judge shouldn't get a defence. Read again.

And you're really dumb for making such spiteful statements against female legal practitioners. You think a road side mechanic. Pompous arrogant prick!

How come you know too well what she wanted to say when even the devil does not know the mind of a man? See? Rather than fix culpability where culpability is, you try to desperately excuse an inexcusable goof, sadly using invectives and rantings as tools. Again, you affirm the assertion that females are more of emotional beings than rational beings. It's not a slight- just who you are. Live with it or go for sex-change cos you evidently can't deal with it.

bamto: When the supposed most learned in the land starts speaking like a road-side mechanic, you don't need a seer to tell you we're in trouble. Elementary law should have told her that in a common-law legal system like ours, there is rebuttable presumption of innocence. We'd perpetrate more injustice if we allow sentiments to becloud our sense of reasoning. The worst of criminals deserve the best legal representation. Little wonder females were not allowed in the legal profession for a very legal time- hard as they try, emotional sentiment superimpose itself on their sense of reasoning- most times!

You don't know what you are saying,that's my humble Assessment.

koonbey: You don't know what you are saying,that's my humble Assessment.

Rather than make your point, you decided to sit in judgment over my opinion? Ba damua.

bamto:

Rather than make your point, you decided to sit in judgment over my opinion? Ba damua.

It's funny; isn't that the same Thing you did concerning the CJ's Comments?

Anyway,I apologize,and for the Record,my "Points" are just some way up this Page.