SIR: UNAMBIGUOUSLY, Section 98 of the Criminal Code, CAP C38, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, provides for ‘official corruption’ by public officials including inviting or receiving bribes, property or benefits for a favour in the discharge of official duties, and pegged the punishment to seven years imprisonment if found guilty of the felony. The classification clearly includes judicial officers and condition precedent is commission or omission of deeds that are listed therein.

The theory of separation of powers is domiciled in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria providing for each of the three arms of government, to wit; executive, legislature and judiciary some degrees of protection from interferences. Essentially, the objective is to entrench checks and balances in governance against absolutism.

The Court of Appeal in Hon Justice Ngajiwa v FRN par Justice Obaseki Adejumo, JCA in the lead judgment stated that by the doctrine of separation of powers in the constitution, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) lacks powers to investigate or prosecute serving judicial officers except such judicial officers have first been dismissed or retired by the National Judicial Council (NJC). However, the court failed to put into consideration a scenario where a particular act by a judicial officer amounts to both a criminal offence and gross misconduct which implies that whilst the NJC battles it as a gross misconduct, the Police or EFCC freely investigates and prosecutes on the criminal aspects. Emphatically, a deed could simultaneously amount to misconduct and crime, and distinguishably, the former only breaches professional ethics unlike crimes that are offences against the state.

In all fairness, the judgment is isolationistic for the judiciary. It implies that the court has diplomatically designed additional immunity clauses for the judiciary, on a par with the president, vice president, governors and deputies. The legislature too have severally, moved motions to accord same to their principal officers but still pirouetting. It therefore leaves the helpless masses as the only losers without any immunity as any misconduct pitilessly quarantines them up to the maximum prison.

By the existing constitutional arrangements, judicial officers are not immune from criminal prosecutions except while on official duties. A judicial officer who commits criminal offences can be arrested outside the court premises as official duties are strictly limited to juristic obligations which bribery, treasury-looting, murder and other vices are not inclusive. At the moment, immunity from criminal prosecution is provided in Section 308 CFRN and covers only the government officials listed therein.

A salient question is – could a judge who pulled out a rifle and shot a person be left for NJC to investigate prior to prosecution by the Police? Even whilst the immunity as stated above subsists, Section 143 supra unequivocally enabled the legislature which is a different arm, pursuant to checks and balances, to investigate the executive officials covered by the clause and if culpable, impeach them in lieu of prosecution unlike the present strange judicial missile that judicial officers are untouchable except by colleagues in the profession.

The verdict is a mockery on the Montesquieu theory and must not see green light at the apex court.
http://thenationonlineng.net/immunity-for-judges/

samstradam:
As there is almost a consensus legal opinion that the CJN cannot be tried by any court in Nigeria for any crime or infraction he commits without the NJC’s say so- I ask the lawyers and law students on this forum, where in the world is this practiced?

I am aware that the term “Judicial Immunity” exists but from what I have been able to understand, especially from the American example , this immunity only covers a judge in the performance of his legitimate judicial functions (i.e. similar to legislative immunity about things said on the House floor). Thus a Judge cannot be held liable or criminalized for any actions, genuine mistakes or errors he makes in the performance of his duty as a Judge. This is plausible and quite understandable. Even doctors enjoy some immunity when practicing.

But with the explanation all our legal luminaries are giving concerning this current CJN’s case, no Judge in Nigeria can be prosecuted for any crimes off the bench also unless the NJC says so. This if true must go against natural justice and suggests that judges and Judical Officers are superior to all other sets of Nigerians as no profession in this country, even the Military, enjoys this sort of Above-The-Law status.

Anyway back to the question: where in the world is something similar practiced?

GenSpecifics:
[s][/s]

Where in the world do you have two parallel legal codes?

Where in the world is a religious title holder mentioned in the constitution and given full supreme authority and constitutional recognition and a govt funded office?

You must be another daft oyoruba hypocritical clown.

You can not cherry pick which part of the constitution or law you like to obey.

Time for total constitutional reform or you get to have your oyoruba proxy president to Sokoto.

pryme:


And insulting the Op makes you look smart now?
The Grey areas in the constitution is what lawyers use to defend their case, the same constitution that says a judge can only be dismissed by the NJC, is the same constitution that empowers the law enforcement agencies to prosecuted and arrest anybody committing a crime, apart from the President, Vp, Governor and Deputy Govs.

So while you chase the NJC side of the constitution, the opposition will chase the No immunity clause side of the constitution.
And both of them are right, that's the sad part.

United States

In the United States, judicial immunity is among a handful of forms of absolute immunity, along with prosecutorial immunity, legislative immunity, and witness immunity. The U.S. Supreme Court has characterized judicial immunity as providing "the maximum ability [of judges] to deal fearlessly and impartially with the public".[5] The justification is as follows: because of the likelihood of innocent individuals being convicted in a court of law under false claims, the "burden" of being subjected to a court of law (a trial) would "dampen" the judges "enthusiasm" or "passion".[6] Opponents of judicial immunity argue that this doctrine is not adequately justified.[7] For example, judges could be shielded from any personal capacity liability, and still be subject to official capacity liability so that they may be held accountable for their injurious acts -- thus "balancing" the "evil" to better protect the fundamental rights of victims.

Judicial immunity does not protect judges from suits stemming from administrative decisions made while off the bench, like hiring and firing decisions. But immunity generally does extend to all judicial decisions in which the judge has proper jurisdiction, even if a decision is made with "corrupt or malicious intent."[8] In 1997 West Virginia judge Troisi became so irritated with a rude defendant, he stepped down from the bench, took off his robe, and bit the defendant on the nose.[9] He pleaded no contest to state charges but was acquitted of federal charges of violating the defendant's civil rights.[10] He spent five days in jail and was put on probation.[11]

Because the immunity is attached to the judicial nature of the acts, not the official title of the officeholder, judicial immunity also applies to administrative hearings, although in some situations, only qualified immunity applies.[12] In determining whether absolute or qualified immunity should be provided, the U.S. Supreme Court has identified the following factors, according to the Shriver Center's Federal Practice Manual for Legal Aid Attorneys:[12]

(a)The need to assure that the individual can perform his functions without harassment or intimidation; (b) the presence of safeguards that reduce the need for private damages actions as a means of controlling unconstitutional conduct; (c) insulation from political influence; (d) the importance of precedent; (e) the adversary nature of the process; and (f) the correctability of error on appeal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_immunity

pryme:


And insulting the Op makes you look smart now?

The Grey areas in the constitution is what lawyers use to defend their case, the same constitution that says a judge can only be dismissed by the NJC, is the same constitution that empowers the law enforcement agencies to prosecuted and arrest anybody committing a crime, apart from the President, Vp, Governor and Deputy Govs.

So while you chase the NJC side of the constitution, the opposition will chase the No immunity clause side of the constitution.
And both of them are right, that's the sad part.

Perspective
Sentiments aside, no law says judges cannot be arrested, writes James Ikechukwu
I am not a member of the All Progressives Congress (APC). As a matter of fact, I do not like the party. I dislike the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) even more. But on the war against corruption, I support wholeheartedly the Buhari administration.
In early 2008, Kenya erupted into violence in which several thousands of people lost their lives. You know why? The people vowed they would not go to the courts to seek electoral redress. They dubbed the patently corrupt courts the “Kibaki courts”. Two years after, it was the turn of the unabashedly corrupt Cote d’Ivoire court to set the nation on fire by declaring that Laurent Gbagbo had won a presidential election, which the whole world knew the opposition leader, Alassane Quattara, had clearly won.
The country’s electoral body had declared Quattara winner but the corrupt Constitutional Council, ruled otherwise. The scale of blood-letting that follows is still very fresh on our minds. People blame Gbagbo for the crimes against humanity and civil war but the real culprits, who undermined the Cote d’Ivoire’s national security were the corrupt judges.
Even here in Nigeria, it has been acknowledged that the loss of faith in the judicial system is what led to the post-election violence of 2011 and other intermittent acts of violence or recourse to self-help across the country.
Section 15 (5) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) declares emphatically that “The State shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power.” The word “shall” is mandatory. Therefore, all lovers of the security, stability and prosperity of the Nigeria must join hands with the current government to wage war against corruption in our judicial system. This is not the time to play politics. We must not allow corrupt judicial officers to push the generality of Nigerians to regard self-help as the last hope of the common man or any citizen before we act.
The leadership of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) says the invasion and arrest of some judges in the wee hours of Saturday, 8 October, 2016 is unconstitutional. With due respect to the learned SANs, which aspects of the constitution or laws of the federation were breached by the Department of State Services (DSS)? A combined reading of the extant Criminal Code, the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA, 2015) and of course, the Constitution of Nigeria shows the DSS has acted within the ambit of the law.
For example, Sections 12 (2) and 13 of ACJA (2015) empowers a law officer to break into any house for the purpose of effecting an arrest of a suspect, who refuses to co-operate with the officer. I should like to amplify that any private citizen of Nigeria, male or female is protected by law (s.23 ACJA) to effect the arrest of any suspected criminal and hand him/her over to a prosecuting authority. In the same vein,
Section 43 (1) ACJA says: “A warrant of arrest may be executed on any day, including a Sunday or public holiday.” And s. 148 of ACJA states that “A search warrant may be issued and executed at any time on any day, including a Sunday or public holiday.”
I have heard the argument by a couple of learned colleagues that certain provisions of the ACJA 2015 are in breach of the constitution. I do not agree. Even if that were to be correct, until the Act is set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction, it remains a law in force and valid to all intents and purposes. And so, such an argument is of no moment at this momentous turning point in our nation’s history.
Again, the National Judicial Council (NJC) is only empowered to discipline judges but the body cannot arrest, prosecute or sentence any judge found to be involved in corruption to a term of imprisonment. Judges have no immunity from arrest or prosecution for any crime committed. Only the President, Vice President, Governors and Deputy Governors have immunity from arrest and prosecution while in office. Law enforcement officers must therefore be allowed to do their job.
In this connection, one must condemn in unmistakable terms, the attempt by Governor Wike of Rivers State to prevent men of the DSS from performing their duties in Port-Harcourt on the said early hours of Saturday. This amounts to obstruction of justice, which in itself is a crime. Indeed, Wike should be investigated and charges preferred against him after the expiration of his tenure. It is trite in law that time does not run against the state.
Judges, just like the legislators, can however not be arrested based on their pronouncements in the courts or floor of parliament as the case may be. Finally, the arrest of judges is not and does not constitute a threat to democracy. The real threat to democracy is corruption, especially in the Bench.
In the cacophony of reactions to the arrest of some judges suspected to have committed acts of corruption by DSS, we must never be deceived into forgetting the substance by chasing shadows. Were those judges guilty of corrupt practices or not? Were the funds recovered from them a product of sleaze and corrupt acts or not? Questions like these should be our preoccupation.
It is high time we rid the Nigerian judiciary of corrupt elements and saved this country from sliding into the Hobbesian state of nature. In that state, life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” We should support President Muhammadu Buhari on the course of his administration to halt the dangerous slide to the state of nature.
– Ikechukwu wrote from Lagos

https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2016/10/31/judges-have-no-immunity-from-arrest/

Nigeria, CJN, Justice Walter Onnoghen as such move will amount to prosecutorial misadventure.

The Federal Government had earlier asked Onnoghen to vacate his office over failure to declare his assets as required by the law and moved to arraign him at the Code of Conduct Tribunal, CCT.

But Falana, in a statement on Saturday faulted FG”s move to press charges against the CJN.

According to him, “The charge against the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen ought not to have been instituted at the Code of Conduct of Tribunal in view of the case of Nganjiwa v FRN (2017) LPELR 43391 wherein the Court of Appeal held that a judicial officer who has not been investigated by the National Judicial Council and sanctioned for misconduct cannot be arraigned in any criminal court in Nigeria.

“As all authorities are bound by the Court of Appeal verdict, the case should be withdrawn by the Attorney-General of the Federation without any delay because it is likely to be a prosecutorial misadventure,” he said.

From the NBA Chairman, Akure Branch:

RE: ARRAIGNMENT OF HIS LORDSHIP, HON. JUSTICE WALTER SAMUEL ONNOGHEN, CJN:
LET THE LAW BE THE GUIDE.

Divergent reactions have greeted the news filtering in that the the Chief Justice of Nigeria, His Lorsship, Hon. Justice Walter Samuel Onnoghen will be arraigned before the Code of Conduct Bureau on Monday 14th January. Surprisingly, these reactions, coming from lawyers, are not based on law as it is. Most opinions and condemnations being voiced out are based on emotions, sentiments, political affiliation and all you can think of but law.

The starting point is to examine the proposed charge(s) against His Lordship. From reports made available, the CJN is alleged to have maintained foreign accounts and domiciliary accounts in foreign currency; His Lordship is alleged to have failed to declare his assets in violation of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers.

The second step is to examine the provisions of the law as it relates to the allegation about to be turned charges against His Lordship, the Hon. CJN.

Now, Schedule V, Part 1, of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended provides in paragraph 11 thereof as follows:

11.1. "Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, every public officer shall within three months after the coming into force of this Code of Conduct or immediately after taking office and thereafter -
a. at the end of every four years; and
b. at the end of his term of office, submit to the Code of Conduct Bureau a written declaration of all his properties, assets, and liabilities and those of his unmarried children under the age of eighteen years.

11.2. Any statement in such declaration that is found to be false by any authority or person authorised in that behalf to verify it shall be deemed to be a breach of this Code."

The same law provides that no public officer shall maintain any foreign account.

The third step is to enquire whether these constitutional provisions apply to the Chief Justice of the Federation and the answer can only be found in the law.

Schedule V part ii of the 1999 Constitution as amended provides for the categories of persons recognised by law as public officers. These includes

5. "Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justices of the Supreme Court, President and Justices of the Court of Appeal, all other judicial officers and all staff of courts of law."

It is thus without much ado that one can safely submit that the Chief Justice of Nigeria, His Lordship Hon. Justice Walter Samuel Onnoghen is a Public Officer. His Lordship is also bound by the provisions of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers as contained in the Constitution of the Federal Republic.

The fourth step is to examine the law as to what step could be taken by the Federal Government, through the Attorney General of the Federation when there is a breach or an alleged breach of any of these provisions.

Paragraph 12 of part 1 if the fifth schedule to the 1999 constitution provides:

12. "Any allegation that a public officer has committed a breach of or has not complied with the provisions of this Code shall be made to the Code of Conduct Bureau."

Now what is the AGF proposing to do? Nothing but complying with the law. Then why the hullabaloo? Those who oppose the step being taken by the Federal Government have advanced basically three arguments. First, they claim that independence of the judiciary is paramount. They have however forgotten to differentiate between the person of Mr. Hon. Justice Walter Samuel Onnoghen as a Nigerian who is not above the law and who could commit offence: a Nigerian who is not immuned and who is not better than many others His Lordship had tried and sentenced. The proponents of independence of the judiciary have failed, whether by commission or commission, to see that the office of the CJN is what is meant by judicial independence and not the person in the office. They have refused to appreciate the necessity of subjecting every person to equal treatment before the law, knowing that failure to so do portends great risk to our commonwealth.

The second reason being put forward by defenders of His Lordship, Hon. Justice Walter Samuel Onnoghen CJN is that the timing of the arraignment is suspect. According to them, the proposed charge is akin to an attempt by the ruling political party to compromise Election Petitions. This argument, every trained legal mind who agree, is fallacious. An offence can only be reported and tried when discovered. The GJN must be prepared to face and stand trial. And the burden is on His Lordship to prove his innocence as Paragraph 11.3, Part 1 of Schedule V of the 1999 Constitution deems a defendants guilty until contrary is proved.

11.3. "Any property or assets acquired by a public officer after any declaration required under this Constitution and which is not fairly attributable to income, gift, or loan approved by this Code shall be deemed to have been acquired in breach of this Code unless the contrary is proved.

Admittedly, the premise upon which the third argument is based is true but the conclusion drawn therefrom is false. The premise of the argument is that the Federal Government cannot remove the CJN without following due process, that is through the JSC. Yes, that is the law and it has received judicial backing in the case of NGANJIWA v. FRN, However, the conclusion drawn by anti-prosecution of Hon. Justice Walter Samuel Onnoghen CJN is fallacious. Hon. Justice Walter Samuel Onnoghen CJN cannot be removed except by recommendations of the National Judicial Service Commiasion. His Lordship can however be prosecuted by the Code of Conduct Bureau and a conviction by the Bureau can be a basis for NJC's recommendation for removal.

Let us allow the rule of law and not the law of rulers. Hon. Justice Walter Samuel Onnoghen is just another Nigerian who should subject himself to laws that govern all Nigerians.

Ola Dan Olawale Esq.,
Chairman,
NBA, Akure Branch.

samstradam:
As there is almost a consensus legal opinion that the CJN cannot be tried by any court in Nigeria for any crime or infraction he commits without the NJC’s say so- I ask the lawyers and law students on this forum, where in the world is this practiced?

I am aware that the term “Judicial Immunity” exists but from what I have been able to understand, especially from the American example , this immunity only covers a judge in the performance of his legitimate judicial functions (i.e. similar to legislative immunity about things said on the House floor). Thus a Judge cannot be held liable or criminalized for any actions, genuine mistakes or errors he makes in the performance of his duty as a Judge. This is plausible and quite understandable. Even doctors enjoy some immunity when practicing.

But with the explanation all our legal luminaries are giving concerning this current CJN’s case, no Judge in Nigeria can be prosecuted for any crimes off the bench also unless the NJC says so. This if true must go against natural justice and suggests that judges and Judical Officers are superior to all other sets of Nigerians as no profession in this country, even the Military, enjoys this sort of Above-The-Law status.

Anyway back to the question: where in the world is something similar practiced?

https://www.channelstv.com/2019/02/05/impunity-will-prevail-if-legal-community-continues-to-betray-its-calling-soyinka/

Nobel Laureate Professor Wole Soyinka on Tuesday raised concern about how impunity has allegedly taken over the country.

In a statement entitled ‘Trivialise Corruption, Neutralise Justice!”, he took a swipe at some members of the legal community and blamed politicians for the rate of impunity.

“The reign of impunity will prevail as long as the legal community continues to betray its calling, its oath of office, even its rites of professional collegiality and its responsibility to the rest of us,” Professor Soyinka said.

He added, “It is disappointing that even under a government that promised to dust up the files of political murders and end that reign of homicidal impunity, the Association has not thought fit to demand from the Buhari government its findings.”

According to the Nobel Laureate, impunity covers all crimes including material corruption and any social or governance institution which fails to stem the tide of criminality flings open the channels of impunity.

READ ALSO: Appeal Court Adjourns Hearing On Onnoghen’s Suit Challenging His Suspension

He accused President Muhammadu Buhari of applying what he described as “hands-off approach” to the menace of killings by herdsmen in parts of the country.

Professor Soyinka further criticised some members of the judiciary for their roles in recent events in the country, particularly the trial of Justice Walter Onnoghen.

He also cautioned Nigerians to be on red alert as such happenings have become synonymous with election periods in the country.

The Nobel Laureate, however, lauded a group of lawyers he referred to as the reformist council who have taken it upon themselves to clear the alleged rot in the judiciary.

Read the full statement below,

TRIVIALISE CORRUPTION, NEUTRALISE JUSTICE!

It is heartening news that some 20 CONCERNED LAWYERS have come together to undertake the mission of cleaning up the Aegean stables that seem to pass today for the Nigerian Judiciary. Some of us do need an institution to which we can look up, of which we should even live in awe. Some find that in religious institutions, others in traditional fixtures, some even in family and so on. All agree that the Order of Justice is a pre-eminent candidate for collective regard and even self-regulation. No matter, we all know that, without Justice, society unravels at the seams, and its citizens resort to self-help.

I feel especially exercised by recent happenings within that Body currently from a dominant perspective: it has become increasingly fashionable to sneer at any anti-corruption preoccupation. No, no one actually ever goes so far as to condone corruption. Perish the thought! Gradually, however, the nation’s psyche is being both subtly and brazenly returned to accept not simply corruption as the norm of social relationships, but its heightened product, impunity, as a national emblem. The justification? The machinery that was launched against corruption with such fanfare, it is claimed, has run aground. Selectivity has been cited as proof. Insincerity, non-seriousness, cynical distraction, are routine assessments of the current governmental campaign.

Even the heady draught of ‘stomach infrastructure’ – ‘na anti-corruption we go chop?’ is now applauded, accompanied by guffaws wherever decanted. Not surprising then, that it was only a matter of time before the flagbearer of one of the ‘parties to beat’ came out openly to dismiss the punitive option, delivering the promise of Amnesty as one of the corner-stones of his plans for the nation. It was a well-calculated gambit. That candidate, an astute politician with his nose to the ground, found that ground primed, ready and conducive. Soon, this will be topped by some rivalling knight in shining armour from rivalling parties who promise prosecution and prison sentence for anyone who bad-mouths corruption – of course, always with a caveat – until all the ills that infest society have been completely eradicated – guinea-worm, river blindness, soil erosion, oil pollution, rape, kidnapping incest etc. etc. not forgetting the transformation of the entire national infrastructure and the full elimination of the last vestiges of Boko Haram, killer herdsmen, Lassa bearing rodents and potholes on the road.

Must one reiterate the obvious? It seems we must. A basic awareness of the link between corruption and all the above-named preoccupations is fast disappearing. Such as hospitals that were never built, or never provisioned. Unthinkable is the proposition that a military commander who diverts funds meant for the elimination of Boko Haram to his family is even more despicable than Boko Haram which does the actual killing of innocents. And what of high-profile murders that had their roots in the open adoption of corruption as a lifestyle, and the increasing sophistication of cover-up operations?

No connection between the rising tide of unemployment and the corrupt wastage of resources meant for industrialisation and job generation? For the stubborn skeptics, and/ or those who understandably mistrust the testimony of former government associates, such as Okonjo-Iweala’s FIGHTING CORRUPTION IS DANGEROUS, perhaps they will at least credit the personal testimony of a battle-scarred Nigerian businessman as expressed in a passage from his recent autobiography. That work, artlessly and refreshingly frank, written by a businessman, Newton Jibunoh makes the following revelation in the chapter titled, CORRUPTION, aka GIFTING IN CONTRACTS:

“I would go to Mr Farrington (Jibunoh’s boss) on so many occasions and say, this is the situation, this is the truth (i.e., it’s ‘gift’ or lose). Farrington would refer it to London and London would say, no way. I tell you, if you go into how Dumez left Nigeria, how Boutgyes left Nigeria, how Guffanti left Nigeria, how Taylor Woodrow Nigeria, it came from this issue. They all packed up. Taylor Woodrow used to be beside us at Costain. They packed up.”

So, ‘na anti-corruption we go chop?’ is not entirely rhetorical Some do chop and distend on corruption. Others, however, starve from job losses and die of it!

Yes, it is election time, and issues that are normally generalised take on enhanced desperation. A recent image sticks to the mind, and for it, we must be thankful to that very desperation that is born of elections. Those who are familiar with the culture of organised crime – as perfected, structurally and sociologically by the Italian Mafia, will have caught that image. Perhaps it struck me forcefully because earlier, the nation has been treated to alarms of a Sanni Abacha coming back to rule the nation. It is the image of a Mafia lieutenant paying due homage to the Capo di Capi Tutti. At Freedom Park, only this last day of January, I bade the nation beware of the convocation of the Conclave of the Corrupt.

The warning was prompted by that most evocative image. Many have only seen such scenarios in cinema – the Don Corleone narratives. I have however seen it in gruesome activation. I witnessed it first-hand in the ‘before and after’ of the civilian revolution that was – coincidentally – led by two lawyers. They fought, and restored the rule of law in Sicily under seemingly impossible conditions. One of them lost his life in the process, the other lived to tell the tale of the rescue and transformation of a society whose mayor he also became. Sicily, that erstwhile island of fear has now become a beacon of liberal culture and social enlightenment.

By contrast, here, to put it charitably, our lawyers appear to be confused about what their role should be when confronted by the spectre of impropriety within their own Guild – note, I do not even say ‘corruption’. Impropriety will do for now. Is it really that hard to pursue the letter of the law and provisions of the constitution, simultaneously with the pursuit of an ethical imperative and thus, guide this nation in the morality of balanced perspectives? Is it really impossible to interweave both? The latter – the ethical imperative has gone missing in the overall collective voice of the NBA over the affair of the Chief Justice of Nigeria. The scantiest lip-service has been done to that social plinth, and I find this most distressful.

Impunity covers all crimes, not just material corruption. And any social or governance institution which, through act or negligence, fails to stem the tide of criminality within its charge, flings open the sluices of impunity. This has been the case of President Buhari in his lacklustre, indeed hands-off approach to the menace of the killer herdsmen – at least at the beginning, before swathes of Nigeria were reduced to slaughter fields, thriving farms erased off the food supply chain of the nation. (They are back, by the way, reported to have recently set fire to farms in Oyo State!) Leadership lapse was further compounded by admission by the governor of Kaduna State that he had been paying ‘blood money’ to the killers responsible for that human and sustenance campaign of depletion!

Impunity stalks the land, indeed it is virtually lording it all social interstices. Let no one take my word for it – simply turn the pages of the media any day. Impunity’s ravages churn the mind. Somehow, this nation – and here again we turn to our learned friends – this nation generally failed to recognise, much less learn from the murder and enabling implications of the unsolved murder of Bola Ige, the nation’s Attorney-General and Minister of Justice. The Bar Association accepted the casual disposition of its erstwhile captain and has – understandably perhaps? – moved on. For some of us, however, the files are not closed. Others also appear to be determined to keep them open, though of course, remain blissfully unaware that their boastful, impenitent conduct in other departments constantly re-ignite the time clouded embers. I believe that the present crisis in judicial ranks offers yet another opportunity to bring up that tragedy starkly and rub the nation’s face in its horror. Only thus do we make all understand why it remains intolerable that any attempt be made at trivialising the nature of corruption. especially in order to score dismissive political points. The work of the Reformist Twenty – now firmly established in our minds as a pledge – is clearly cut out for them, and must not be shirked.

For those whose memories have faded on that crime: Bola Ige was murdered in his bedroom by professional assassins, his police minders having abandoned him to his own devices. Before his final posting as Minister of Justice, he was Minister of Power – and what a frustrating tenure that was for him, frustrating and humiliating. As I have remarked elsewhere numerous times, his was a ministry in which I took keen personal interest. He kept me posted on the ups and downs – the betrayals, conspiracies and actual bouts of sabotage. When he left Abuja to set up camp in Lagos in order to slice through to the centre of sabotage, we remained in constant touch, either in person, or through his Special Assistant, Dr Olu Agunloye. Bola Ige had been named to a prestigious legal position in the United Nations and was then on his way to take up the posting. His past in the Ministry of Power pursued him, however. It had pursued him into the ‘face-saving’ ministry of Justice. That transfer however only placed been in an even more powerful position to bring to justice those who had held this nation to ransom for years and slow her development through systemic corruption of gargantuan dimensions in his former ministry. He had to be eliminated.

That was tragic enough. However, what happened next is what remains to haunt this nation, at least those portions of it that still attempt to cling to even the barest shreds of social conscience. Talk of history repeating itself! A shaming round of judicial penkelemes, near identical to present proceedings, ensued. Even before the trial proper, judges sat, fulminated, cooed, withdrew, were re-assigned, recused themselves, sat tight, defied pressure, succumbed etc.etc. on the issue of bail to some of the accused. Virtually all complained of external interference. One of them, Justice Abass, kept a diary in which he accused – among other culprits members of the Bar – that is, members of the Nigerian Bar Association – of improper importuning on behalf of some of the accused. One of them was set down as actually bringing messages from highly placed “least expected” quarters. The judge was moved to soliloquise, in his diary: What is their interest? What is at stake that officers sworn to uphold the law should attempt to exert improper influence on me, and in such a brazen manner. The importuning included material inducements.

Justice Abass put up a struggle but eventually threw in the sponge. The pressure, the harassment, proved too much. Before that, however, he made copies of his diary and distributed the pages for safe-keeping. Three or four of these pages came into my possession – I made this public knowledge at the time. I asserted that, at the very least, in attempting to solve that murder mystery, the diary was one place to begin. Who were these highly placed people who had such a prohibitive stake in Bola Ige’s murder trial as well as the situation of the suspects that they suborned sworn officers of the law. The crime, incidentally, was littered with clues – this was just another wedge through which it became mandatory to penetrate through to the sordid crime and identify the conspirators. The case had developed unsavoury but exceedingly useful ramifications. Who were these forces so bent on subverting the processes of justice in the investigation of the murder of the highest Law Officer of the land? We screamed in vain. The NBA did not take up the challenge. That Association had a primary responsibility of ferreting out the tools of subversion in their midst. Justice Abass set down dates, place, hour and witnesses – in writing. He used a code of initials for participants.

This narrative remains incomplete without reference to another form of intervention. Along the way, during our own ‘busybody’ forays, we invaded the American Consulate. Why? Simply because we had learnt that the American government had offered help, that they had assigned some experts to assist the Nigerian police in unearthing the mystery of the murder, but that the police had rejected help. We headed for the embassy to insist that they should ignore the Nigerian police. Bola Ige was already an international civil servant of the United Nations anyway, and was entitled, even more so in extra-judicial death, to considerations of international intervention. The Consul-General received us cordially. She confirmed our information, that the Nigerian government had refused the offer of assistance. I asked permission to use her phone and we called the president, who was none other than Olusegun Obasanjo. Was it true, I asked, that his government had rejected external assistance?

Details of the exchange are not relevant to this narrative, though they are readily available if of interest to anyone. What matters is that there was serious talk of introducing lie-detectors to be used on the accused, its effectiveness or whatever or acceptability. We were put on Hold while Obasanjo called the Inspector-General of Police, and put him on the speaker-phone. All that is of interest, but is not really crucial to the subject of this intervention. There will be further elaborations in due course.

I have brought it up principally to exclaim: History Strikes Again! Also to decry yet again the unbelievably short memory span of that breed known as Nigerians. Amnesia is often a contrived tactic of escapism, which, to put it bluntly, is another word for moral cowardice. I have brought it up principally to remind the judiciary, and associate orders such as the Bar Association, that the war between impunity and Justice is an incessant one. Corruption is not a trait to be trivialised for political opportunism or locker-room guffaws. Corruption murdered the Nation’s Minister of Justice and Attorney-General, and Justice was rendered helpless in the defence of its own Prime Advocate.

The reign of impunity will prevail as long as the legal community continues to betray its calling, its oath of office, even its rites of professional collegiality and its responsibility to the rest of us. It is disappointing that even under a government that promised to dust up the files of political murders and end that reign of homicidal impunity, the Association has not thought fit to demand from the Buhari government its findings. There is more than ample material to warrant a Judicial Commission, and that demand has come up again and again. It will continue for as long as there remains a shred of conscience somewhere in this nation, especially when provoked into resurgence by the antics of those who murdered Justice to enthrone corruption and bask in the miasma of Impunity.

As always, election time brings out the worst of animalism in political participants. Justice was betrayed on that edition, repudiated, hung up to dry, and the door left wide open for commissioned killers. Bola Ige, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, died in the line of duty. Justice Salami at least survived the rites of passage – I felt honoured to have been invited by him to deliver the lecture for his valedictory occasion. The government at the time of Ige’s killers know the truth. That government protected – I repeat – protected, and rewarded his killers.

Those who wish to dispute this had better first immerse themselves in the circumstances of that murder, and the unconstitutional, indeed illegal trajectory of the principal accused, one that not only facilitated his unconstitutional participation in the ensuing election but catapulted him straight to the occupancy of the seat that had been kept warm for him during his trial and absence. On release, he was ushered straight into the slot of Chairman of the Appropriation Committee of the House of Representatives. That was not all. The head of that government, General Olusegun Obasanjo, proceeded to burnish Ige’s memory with characteristic zeal. With that victim in no position to defend himself, that inveterate letter-writer sent a reference letter to Ige’s new abode – just in case there are ministries of power over yonder:

“We put Bola Ige there to rectify the power situation. It turned out that he did not know his left hand from his right”

Bola Ige’s murder took place at election time. Once again, we are confronted with another election. Killings and kidnappings have escalated. Once again – coincidence be damned! – the judiciary is in disarray. A political association – which I once described as a den of killers – is regrouping, wishes to direct the fortunes of this nation yet again. This nation needs no reminding that, yes indeed, the rule of law must prevail, and constitutionality must not be trivialised. Neither, however, must criminality, or else, history merely repeats itself in increasingly dismal accents. Justice becomes neutralised.

Citizen Forum welcomes the Reformist Council of Twenty. On the political forum, we urge: Let the ghosts of the past be laid to rest. Let a new breed emerge.

Wole SOYINKA

Convener, CITIZEN FORUM

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2019/02/the-cjn-saga-and-the-role-of-lawyers-in-nigerias-democracy/

The CJN saga and the role of lawyers in Nigeria’s democracy
On February 28, 20194:23 By Edo Ukpong

Nowadays the battle to control the messaging space has produced a subconscious antenna in most readers to look at the by-line first to foretell the message or the motivation. Therefore, since the by-line to this piece will most likely not offer many clues or at best, be misleading, let me be helpful upfront. I am a commercial law practitioner who has been exclusively engaged in legal practice since my admission to the Nigerian Bar in 1985. My agenda is the survival of the relevance of the legal profession in Nigeria. Admittedly, the ‘CJN Saga’ has prompted this intervention. The attendant divisive reactions and commentary on the saga has seriously polarised the country. Onnoghen Suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen Lawyers have joined the fray on the different divides but I do not get a sense that there is the awareness, that it is our profession and its relevance in our society that is on trial. Every collection of human beings, who by the exigencies of geography find themselves interacting with one another, will need structures to superintend their relationships inter se. These will involve duties and responsibilities to themselves and to the society as a collective. This arrangement, which is necessary for harmonious and orderly coexistence in any society, is what is termed as governance. Over time, principles and policies have developed to guide governance and whilst no uniformity exists, some of these principles and policies have gained universal recognition as forming the bedrock of meaningful governance. Lawyers play a key role in formulating and applying these principles and are accorded due recognition as being indispensable to the governance process. A fundamental principle of meaningful governance is the broad concept of justice. In order for democratic governance to thrive in Nigeria, there must exist an atmosphere where the citizenry collectively subscribe to rules, universal obedience to those rules and uniform and fair enforcement mechanisms. Whereas lawyers are critical to the maintenance of this atmosphere, more critical, however, will be the perception of the citizenry in general terms as to the fairness and efficacy of the state of justice administration. As Hubert Humphrey, former American Vice-President opined, “we cannot expect to breed respect for law and order amongst people who do not share the fruits of our freedom.” READ ALSO: Onnoghengate : Saraki, Young lawyers back Buhari, shun NBA boycott The society has developed by design that entrusts to the body of lawyers a pivotal role in maintaining a justice system that functions fairly and for the common good. My fear, borne out of years of experience and keen observation, is that the body of lawyers in Nigeria has not developed the group consciousness to appreciate the enormity of this role, let alone the uniform gravitas to work to justify the expectations of society. Let me digress to the situation in Pakistan some years ago when then President Pervez Musharraf suspended the Pakistani Constitution. Pakistani lawyers stood up as a body to defy the suspension. Images of lawyers in huge numbers on the streets locking arms and being forcibly carried away by police officers must surely remain ingrained in the memories of a grateful and appreciative Pakistani populace. The action of the Pakistani lawyers is representative of my views and assuredly, that of a vast majority of lawyers worldwide on what lawyers can and must do to earn the respect of society and hence, maintain group relevance. The body of lawyers in Nigeria does not have many secrets. As a member of that body, I find the general perception of the body as being generally composed of selfish, myopic, unscrupulous and greedy fellows as largely representative of the reality. I use the term ‘largely’, very advisedly in the sense that I am of the conviction that a vast majority of lawyers in whatever station, are honourable and professional in the discharge of their calling and duty to society as guardians of civilisation. The problem is with the leadership of the body of lawyers. The leadership in the sense of this piece will include both the formal and informal leaders or if I may borrow the much used and abused but nebulous term – senior lawyers. The soul of the body of lawyers has been hijacked by a group of senior lawyers who are exploiting the uncharacteristic resigned posture of the majority to form a loose but enriching circle of corrupt influence and control. The obvious corruption in the judiciary is symptomatic of the corruption in the society as a whole but the complicity of the judiciary lays bare an existential dilemma for our country. In the event that the democratic governance we seek to entrench, provides for a justice administration system that should protect our commonwealth, what happens when the judiciary is seen as complicit in the plunder of our commonwealth? Nigerians have generally witnessed corruption cases being conducted unendingly, trivialised by absurd theatrics and usually ending in suspicious and unconvincing acquittals or at worst, apologetically lenient sentences. With the mounting evidence of different standards of justice, might it not get to the point soon, where the suffering masses identify corruption as the cause of their suffering, feel helpless and resort to mob justice? It is time for us lawyers to come to terms with our broken justice administration system and take the bull by the horn. If we do not act fast, courageously and selflessly to insist on remedial action, the matter may be taken out of our hands by tendencies without our level of appreciation for the niceties of technicalities and due process and it will not be pleasant. Lawyers as guardians of civilisation must first build uniform opinion on the essence and nature of the civilisation we must project and protect. We must also ensure our compliance with the spirit and intendment of the civilised conduct we seek to entrench in our body polity. We must hearken to the immortal words of Earl Warren, former Chief Justice of the USA – “It is the spirit and not the form of law that keeps justice alive.” Corruption is undoubtedly an existential threat to the fabric of our society and if our primary responsibility is to create a civilised atmosphere, it means that lawyers must be at the forefront of the fight against corruption. In this light, therefore, the civilisation we ought to promote in our society cannot in any form or shape support the reaction of our group of senior lawyers to the CJN saga. Upon the public revelation of the contents of the charges against the CJN, the body of lawyers ought to have taken an immediate public stance different from that which we witnessed. For the sake of good order, the CJN should have been advised to step aside pending the outcome of the matter at the Code of Conduct Tribunal. There can be no justice without orderliness and the jumping of the correct order to focus on politics and the technicalities of due process when we have ourselves not advised the CJN to follow due process, is a grave error. The error was bound to result in more shambolic actions and reactions. There is no interpretation of the concept of justice in a civilised society, which will allow the CJN to maintain the authority of his office under the weight of such damaging accusations, to preside, even if remotely, over a process in which he is the accused. Moreover, as unpopular as it may seem now, there is no responsible government as the custodian of the people’s mandate to govern, that will helplessly allow that anomalous situation to prevail. The optics of over 50 senior lawyers, literally elbowing their way to gain visibility as defenders of the embattled CJN, unfortunately paints the picture of a group protecting ‘one of its own.’ The duty of the body of lawyers should rather be to protect the society from the consequent damage to its judiciary. Unfortunately, the optics of the CJN saga has solidified the impression of lawyers as promoters of corruption in the consciousness of Nigerians. The intervention by another faction of 20 senior lawyers, who appear to be focused more on the rot in the justice administration system, rather than the defence of an individual, is welcome but will not provide the needed solution. The CJN saga provides a great opportunity and can be the defining moment, where the body of lawyers embarks on self-cleansing and rebrands itself. It is time for younger progressive elements in the profession to organise themselves, articulate and define values for the body that will align with the needs and expectations of our society. Senior lawyers are too shackled by stakes, suspicious of each other and constrained by unhelpful inherited traditions to lead the charge to save the profession. Let me close by suggesting that we bring back Rule 14 of the Rules of Professional Conduct in the Legal Profession 1979. “Nothing operates more certainly to create or foster popular prejudice against lawyers as a class, and to deprive the profession of that full measure of public esteem and confidence which belongs to the proper discharge of its duties than the false claim, often set up by the unscrupulous in defence of questionable transactions, that it is the duty of the lawyer to do whatever may enable him to succeed in winning his client’s cause. …. The office of a lawyer does not permit much less does it demand of him for any client, violation of law or any manner of fraud or chicanery. He must obey his own conscience and not that of his client.”

Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2019/02/the-cjn-saga-and-the-role-of-lawyers-in-nigerias-democracy/